Higher All Time Ranking: Yzerman or Lidstrom?

[DaKineMaui 8]

Anyway, feel free to debate this topic.

Sorry, not much of a topic, and I mean no ill will toward you.

But Yzerman fixed a team. Fixed a team and made it whole.

Could Nick fix a team? Maybe; but it would be because of Stevie. Ask Nick.

[egroen 384]

I dunno...I just don't ge how defense SOMETIMES matters and sometimes doesn't, depending on the discussion. Either it does, or doesn't. There should be no 'sometimes' about it.

I believed Zetterberg and Datsyuk were just as good, if not better than Crosby & Malkin this year because of their overall play. But there is not a huge point disparity between them offensively, as there is between Yzerman's best and Lemieux & Gretzky's best.

I'm not so sure they are better than Ovechkin this year, for instance. But it is a very subjective line to draw, I'll grant.... but I would gladly sacrifice defensive play for Gretzky... that 60 points extra in a season is like having another player out there on the ice.

Plus, Zetterberg and Datsyuk are going to be at least #2 and #3 for the Selke this year. 12th place in voting does not seem near as impressive, and definitely does not make up for the scoring of other seasons I had listed above.

I do agree with you though, you can not just "teach" Selke level defense, and Yzerman had that skill and potential to begin with... and it showed. Bowman just forced him to play it more often... and Yzerman has stated numerous times in interviews that he resisted at first, and that his production did decrease as a result.

Edited June 11, 2008 by egroen

[eva unit zero 271]

I believed Zetterberg and Datsyuk were just as good, if not better than Crosby & Malkin this year because of their overall play. But there is not a huge point disparity between them offensively, as there is between Yzerman's best and Lemieux & Gretzky's best.

I'm not so sure they are better than Ovechkin this year, for instance. But it is a very subjective line to draw, I'll grant.... but I would gladly sacrifice defensive play for Gretzky... that 60 points extra in a season is like having another player out there on the ice.

Plus, Zetterberg and Datsyuk are going to be at least #2 and #3 for the Selke this year. 12th place in voting does not seem near as impressive, and definitely does not make up for the scoring of other seasons I had listed above.

I do agree with you though, you can not just "teach" Selke level defense, and Yzerman had that skill and potential to begin with... and it showed. Bowman just forced him to play it more often... and Yzerman has stated numerous times in interviews that he resisted at first, and that his production did decrease as a result.

A major difference that affected Yzerman vs Gretzky/Lemieux?

Only once in Red Wing history have two players scored 50 goals in the same season; this was 1994, when Fedorov played 28 minutes per game and Yzerman, after coming back from injury, turned 30 goal scorer Ray Sheppard into a 50-goal man.

No time in team history have two players broken the 100 point mark.

Meaning that while Gretzky and Lemieux played their best years with other offensively talented players (for example, five players on the 1993 Pens scored 100+ points) Yzerman's best years were played in the ABSENCE of offensively skilled players.

I don't think the numbers tell an accurate story of how good the players were offensively; Yzerman was closer to Grezky and Lemieux than the numbers suggest, and it's largely because of the fact he could be consistently double or triple-teamed without anyone else on the ice becoming a threat. If teams tried that with Gretzky, the other team had to look at Kurri or Coffey facing less coverage. With Lemieux, teams would have to look at a guy like Stevens or Tocchet, or yet again, Coffey, coming up ice against half-coverage. A daunting prospect.

Of all the 'top' centers in the league during his career, Yzerman is the only one that had to play most of his prime basically by himself. And he was still the third most offensively productive.

Another example...peak linemates.

Mario Lemieux's highest scoring linemate ever in his best years was Jaromir Jagr with 149 points. Wayne Gretzky's was Bernie Nicholls with 150. Yzerman's? Gerard Gallant with 93 points. Only once did Yzerman ever have a 100+ point linemate; this was John Ogrodnick in his second season, which he missed a large portion of.

Lidstrom is top five among defensemen, but Yzerman is top-five among centers. As centers typically see more recognition as 'top' players, I would say this ranks Yzerman above Lidstrom.

[Reds4Life 51]

Lidstrom is top five among defensemen, but Yzerman is top-five among centers. As centers typically see more recognition as 'top' players, I would say this ranks Yzerman above Lidstrom.

OMG Eva, you completly ignore hockey history.

Gretzky, Lemieux, Beliveau, Mikita, Morenz, Messier, Trottier, Lalonde, Schmidt..

Yzerman was not better than any of them. I would put Joe Sakic above Yzerman too.

Lidstrom is top5 defenseman..I agree with that.

[egroen 384]

If Lemieux and Gretzky ceased to exist, there is only one year Yzerman would have won the Art Ross... a lot of people do not realize this.

Yes, it is unfortunate we never saw Yzerman in his prime with better linemates, and I think it is fair to factor that into the equation... however...

Taking all other forwards out of the equation, and only looking at centers (which I do not think is very fair to defensemen, who can be just as vital as a forward), I'm not sure how you have Yzerman as a top 5 center of all time. Sure, if you are just looking at points, but that ignores about 60 years of hockey that fall outside of the high-scoring era Yzerman was fortunate enough to play his prime in.

I have a hard time putting him in the top ten:

1) Gretzky

2) Lemieux

3) Beliveau

4) Morenz

5) Mikita

6) Esposito

These were all guys who were considered the best of their generation at center. Yzerman was not.

7) Clarke

8) Messier

9) Trottier

10) Lalonde

I have Yzerman at around this group, along with:

Schmidt, Sakic, Apps and Taylor.

Edited June 11, 2008 by egroen

[GMRwings1983 8,804]

Sorry, not much of a topic, and I mean no ill will toward you.

But Yzerman fixed a team. Fixed a team and made it whole.

Could Nick fix a team? Maybe; but it would be because of Stevie. Ask Nick.

Apparently it is a good topic, since it's generated 4 pages of debate, most of it going in Lidstrom's favor.

OMG Eva, you completly ignore hockey history.

Gretzky, Lemieux, Beliveau, Mikita, Morenz, Messier, Trottier, Lalonde, Schmidt..

Yzerman was not better than any of them. I would put Joe Sakic above Yzerman too.

Lidstrom is top5 defenseman..I agree with that.

Yzerman was better than all those guys you listed, other than Gretzky, Lemieux and Messier.

[thedisappearer 291]

Yzerman was better than all those guys you listed, other than Gretzky, Lemieux and Messier.

Yes.

Except I would listen to debate about Stevie being better than Messier.

[Electrophile 3,554]

Was Steve better than those players based on numbers and stats or because we're Red Wings fans and we've basically canonized him?

I have the same argument with Yankees fans over Derek Jeter.

[digitaljohn88 4]

Lidstrom is the greater player, but Yzerman is the greater Red Wing.

If that makes any sense.

[omnipotent_hudler 0]

didn't Yzerman basically say that Lidstrom was the best player on the team while he was still playing

Don't really think there's much question here, Lidstrom is probably the best defenseman ever in terms of playing defense.

[C-TownWing 0]

Lidstrom is the greater player, but Yzerman is the greater Red Wing.

If that makes any sense.

Makes perfect sense, since that's how I feel too.

Great arguments on both sides, in fact, after reading a couple of the Yzerman posts, I almost changed my "vote."

Someone referenced the Hockey News book earlier where they rated the 60 best players of the post-expansion era. FWIW, they had Yzerman #6, Lidstrom #9. The catch obviously is that Lids is still very much an active player.

Also of interest: Coffey #16, Hasek #17, Brett Hull #22, Dionne #23, Chelios #32, Park #36, F. Mahovlich #43, Shanahan #49, Robitaille #51, Salming #59, Fedorov #60.

Oh, by the way, Sidney Crosby was #57 after just two seasons (at the time of publication).

[eva unit zero 271]

If Lemieux and Gretzky ceased to exist, there is only one year Yzerman would have won the Art Ross... a lot of people do not realize this.

Yes, it is unfortunate we never saw Yzerman in his prime with better linemates, and I think it is fair to factor that into the equation... however...

Taking all other forwards out of the equation, and only looking at centers (which I do not think is very fair to defensemen, who can be just as vital as a forward), I'm not sure how you have Yzerman as a top 5 center of all time. Sure, if you are just looking at points, but that ignores about 60 years of hockey that fall outside of the high-scoring era Yzerman was fortunate enough to play his prime in.

I have a hard time putting him in the top ten:

1) Gretzky

2) Lemieux

3) Beliveau

4) Morenz

5) Mikita

6) Esposito

These were all guys who were considered the best of their generation at center. Yzerman was not.

Now to be fair...the two guys who are fighting for the 'best of the generation' tag in Yzerman's generation are ranked 1-2 on your list. And everyone else's list. So given that he was not that far behind them, it's not unreasonable to suggest that maybe he was just as good as guy who without Gretzky and Lemieux were considered the top centers?

Yzerman is considered the greatest Red Wing center ever. This is pretty universal, and gives us a point of reference against other great centers; namely Sid Abel, Alex Delvecchio, and Norm Ullman.

All of whom at one point or another were considered the top center in the league.

You have included Beliveau, Mikita, and Esposito. You do realize all three played in the same era, and therefore could not all have been considered the 'top two' of their era? So unless you are saying the third best center from one era is better than the third best center from another, even though the two guys ahead of him are universally considered the top two centers EVER, then your argument of all three of those guys ahead of Yzerman doesn't hold. When you furthermore consider that from 1981 to 1993, either Gretzky or Lemieux was named the first-team center 11 of 13 seasons. That covers Yzerman's entire prime. Had Yzerman not had to contend with Gretzky and Lemieux EVERY YEAR, he would have a few more postseason All-Star selections and trophies. Brad Park is another good example of this kind of thing. Many people consider Bobby Orr to be the greatest player ever. Brad Park was often the top defenseman in the league after Orr in Orr's best years, which is all you could expect of any defenseman EVER if Orr is truly the best ever. So that alone gives Park a solid argument that he is as good as guys who have won a few Norrises, because he would have had three Norrises (minimum) if Orr isn't playing.

How many Norrises would Niedermayer have if Lidstrom weren't around? The answer, based on existing voting, is that Nieder would have won three straight coming out of last season.

Trophies are nice, but you can't use number of trophies won as a serious factor in determining whether a player was better than someone from another era; the competition wasn't the same, so there's no telling whether one player was better but faced stiffer competition.

My argument to this is goaltender's from the 1980s. A major reason the 1980s was so high scoring is that a lot of talented offensive players were in the league, but the goaltending quality was at an all-time low. I personally feel that every single NHL-level netminder today would have been an All-Star candidate in the 1980s. Only a handful of tenders around then were good enough to even be in the league right now. A guy who is a top AHL goalie this year would have been considered top-10 in the world with the same level of play in 1987. But if you go by trophies won, then Pete Peeters was better in his prime than Roberto Luongo, Evgeni Nabokov, Marty Turco, or Chris Osgood have been at their best. Even though Peeters only twice in his career posted a save percentage upwards of .900, and was generally a mediocre goaltender who struggled in a starting role.

Or even better....Bill Durnan is the greatest goaltender ever, as he was considered the top netminder in the league six times in his seven season career.

Was it a Hasek situation, where the guy is just that much above the norm? Or was it a Luc Robitaille/Kevin Stevens thing where the top guys were good players, but it was more about the rest of the field being kinda terrible.

Stan Mikita isn't even considered to have been the best player on his line for the majority of his prime. He had two elite wingers...does that make him individually better than Yzerman? Would Mikita have been a superstar if he wasn't centering Bobby Hull for a decade? Or would he have been another Adam Oates; a guy who was a very good playmaker who happened to click with an excellent finisher. Oates to me is VERY similar to Mikita, in both style and skill level.

Mikita often led the league in scoring centering Hull and Wharram. Hull is generally considered the top player from that line. In other words...Mikita performed well playing his best years with a BETTER player. Imagine if Yzerman had a Bobby Hull to pass to? 200 points doesn't seem out of reach given that kind of help. At which point you have to consider...did Gretzky get 200 because of his skill, or because of the league?

And now we're asking the question of whether Gretzky or Lemieux are even the greatest offensive centers ever, which to this point has been an assumption.

I guess what I'm trying to say is...

What makes one dimensional players who fought for the rank as 'best offensive player' better than a guy who fought for the title of 'best offensive player' but ALSO played well defensively? The fact that they played in an era which didn't include Gretzky and Lemieux?

[Detroit # 1 Fan 2,204]

Yzerman. Points, goals, assists. 3 Stanley Cups as team Captain, his intangibles and his statistics make him better then Lidstrom in my book. No knock on Lidstrom, probably 2 or 3 on the all time list of defenceman, but I just think Yzerman was a better player and will probably be ranked higher.

[KronwallCRUNCH 5]

Obviously, no offense to Stevie, he's THE Captain, but Lidstrom is one of the greatest players of all-time. Lidstrom could very well be the greatest Red Wings player ever, Yzerman brought a lot to the table, but I think Lidstrom is a superior talent.

[KronwallCRUNCH 5]

Sorry, not much of a topic, and I mean no ill will toward you.

But Yzerman fixed a team. Fixed a team and made it whole.

Could Nick fix a team? Maybe; but it would be because of Stevie. Ask Nick.

How "fixed" do you think that team would have been without Lidstrom on the blueline. Null argument.

[Detroit # 1 Fan 2,204]

Yzerman was not better than any of them. I would put Joe Sakic above Yzerman too.

Why would you say that? Yzerman was better defensively, had more goals and assists over his career, there production in the post season is very similar, and Stevie lead his team to more Stanley Cups. Sakic had a good wrist shot, Yzerman had a good slapshot, they both are great, and have tons of heart, but Yzerman is just better then Joe Sakic.

[Reds4Life 51]

Why would you say that? Yzerman was better defensively, had more goals and assists over his career, there production in the post season is very similar, and Stevie lead his team to more Stanley Cups. Sakic had a good wrist shot, Yzerman had a good slapshot, they both are great, and have tons of heart, but Yzerman is just better then Joe Sakic.

Longetivity. Sakic is more durable player.

Of course that I like Steve Yzerman more, he is my most favourite player! But all bias aside, Sakic is slightly better due to his durability imho.

Someone referenced the Hockey News book earlier where they rated the 60 best players of the post-expansion era. FWIW, they had Yzerman #6, Lidstrom #9. The catch obviously is that Lids is still very much an active player.

Also of interest: Coffey #16, Hasek #17, Brett Hull #22, Dionne #23, Chelios #32, Park #36, F. Mahovlich #43, Shanahan #49, Robitaille #51, Salming #59, Fedorov #60.

lol Coffey over Hasek..complete joke. Coffey was brutal in his own end. Definitely not even top20 defenseman while Hasek is top5 goalie of all time. 6 Vezinas 2 Pearsons 2 Harts..no contest.

Steve Yzerman is one of the best players I have ever seen, I love him. I understand all of us here are Red Wings fans, try not to be biased. Nicklas Lidstrom is one of the best defenseman ever, there is no question he was/is better hockey player than Steve Yzerman.

[Guest redwingsfan04]

remember lidstrom played on a sucessful team for the most parts of his carrer

a sucessful team yzerman had built

[Reds4Life 51]

remember lidstrom played on a sucessful team for the most parts of his carrer

a sucessful team yzerman had built

Yeah. It's not like Lidstrom was integral part of 4 last Cups, right?

Steve was imho the best leader in sports history, but to say he built the team is not right.

[DaKineMaui 8]

How "fixed" do you think that team would have been without Lidstrom on the blueline. Null argument.

I have nothing more on this then. 'If' Vladdy woulda stayed heathy, 'If" Stevie woulda stayed sound, who knows?

'If' my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle. Who knows?

#19 ran this team.

[TSM 0]

I have nothing more on this then. 'If' Vladdy woulda stayed heathy, 'If" Stevie woulda stayed sound, who knows?

'If' my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle. Who knows?

#19 ran this team.

LOL...Quote of the year in my book! In all seriousness, I love both guys. Great people, hockey players, great for their respective times. Steve is always number one to me, he is the heart of the franchise to me. But Lidstrom is the product of the lifeblood that Yzerman supplied. I think that Lidstrom would even concede to this point. It's been great reading the arguments both ways though. How lucky we are to have such an unfortunate dilemma. :-P

[Wing Across The Pond 196]

Just imagine if their careers were the other way around.... if Lids was around the time Yzerman was and Yzerman was around now. I think the history gets in the way a bit and you need to consider that.... but I'm a fence sitter and I say I love them both regardless of who is 'better'. I'm just glad they are both Wings.

[Wing Across The Pond 196]

Plus I think to be a great player you have to be MORE than talented... I mean like Crosby now Gretzky was a f***ing whiner and I think that takes away from their amazing talents, I mean come on they consistently whine in games and in press conferences and Vinnie Lecavalier opened a children's hospital... I think things like that give players a boost even though they may not have as much technical ability. But again with Stevie and Nik they're both great captains and stand-out guys so again I'm torn.

[Guest LivingtheDream]

Yzerman never quite dominated his era the way Lidstrom has. A lot of that is because of Gretzky and Lemieux, but still, Lidstrom might go down in history as a better player because he's the best at his position for 10 years. Only a few players in history have been the best at their position for 10 years. Also, Lidstrom has been more durable even in his later years, while Yzerman at this point in his career had already began to decline and was riddled with injuries.

Anyway, feel free to debate this topic.

Why bother comparing when they are both great? However Yzerman was ansd will always be greater. He was the key in bringing a team from the absolute pit of the NHL to the pinnacle. 6th all time in points isn't bad either (he could have had more had he not adjusted his game to win Cups). Of course all this while two guys named Wayne and Mario were around.

[Spinner 6]

I'm just glad they both played for Detroit so to me the point is moot