Hockey News Top 50

[Guest GordieSid&Ted]

THN ranked Lidstrom as the third best Wing. That says all I need to know about what they know about Detroit; which is nothing.

A best players ranking should rank the players, basically, in order of the overall positive contribution they make minus the overall negative contribution they make. ANYONE who ranks Lidstrom as the third best Detroit player on such a list hasn't watched the Wings play in ten years or more, regardless of other rankings. Which makes any further rankings of Detroit players suspect.

That's a great, omnipotent-like opinion to have Eva. And I can certainly appreciate that kind of arrogance as it suits me. But, its still an opinion and at the end of the day the pick for the folks at THN is not Nick. So come to grips with it or continue thinking they're all a bunch of turds who know nothing about Detroit. But hey, we know everything about Detroit so we can't possibly be wrong. Like I said.................homerism, it comes into play whether you like it or not.

If it bothers you so much, write a letter to those folks at THN and ask them if they spend anytime watching the Wings. Hell, do they watch any teams at all? Why would anybody who gets paid to watch hockey watch the Wings. I mean, they were only 1 of the 2 final teams still playing at the end of the season. Maybe they had already made the list and were all out golfing or something prior to the Cup Finals.

Look...I don't care if anybody picks Nick. Personally, I think its a homer pick. That's not to say its a bad pick or a ******* bats*** crazy pick. I think the league is more offense oriented now and that's going to favor offensively gifted players. AO is the the top offensive gun out there. So he gets my pick. Picking Nick doesn't get my panties in a bunch. I could care less. Nobody can win this argument. Frankly, you folks on the Nick is the best wagon need to chill.

[eva unit zero 271]

That's a great, omnipotent-like opinion to have Eva. And I can certainly appreciate that kind of arrogance as it suits me. But, its still an opinion and at the end of the day the pick for the folks at THN is not Nick. So come to grips with it or continue thinking they're all a bunch of turds who know nothing about Detroit. But hey, we know everything about Detroit so we can't possibly be wrong. Like I said.................homerism, it comes into play whether you like it or not.

If it bothers you so much, write a letter to those folks at THN and ask them if they spend anytime watching the Wings. Hell, do they watch any teams at all? Why would anybody who gets paid to watch hockey watch the Wings. I mean, they were only 1 of the 2 final teams still playing at the end of the season. Maybe they had already made the list and were all out golfing or something prior to the Cup Finals.

Look...I don't care if anybody picks Nick. Personally, I think its a homer pick. That's not to say its a bad pick or a ******* bats*** crazy pick. I think the league is more offense oriented now and that's going to favor offensively gifted players. AO is the the top offensive gun out there. So he gets my pick. Picking Nick doesn't get my panties in a bunch. I could care less. Nobody can win this argument. Frankly, you folks on the Nick is the best wagon need to chill.

They can put Ovechkin and Crosby ahead of Lidstrom if they want...but if you ask 95% of people who spent any significant amount of time watching the Wings this season, Lidstrom is the best player on the team. if you're ranking based on playoffs, maybe you can move Zetterberg to the top spot...but Lidstrom still belongs ahead of Datsyuk; and all three should be ahead of Crosby. Not to mention that Osgood would have to be in the #2 spot on the team if it were playoffs-based.

Even if you argue in favor of Ovechkin or Crosby because the league is more offensive-oriented...Lidstrom belongs in the top three in the league without a doubt. THN got it wrong. They probably left Osgood completely off the list despite the fact he was a Vezina contender and the best goalie in the playoffs, too, but likely included Miikka Kiprusoff and his stellar 2.69 GAA, .906 save percentage, and stats that have declined every year with Calgary; just as they did every year with San Jose. So yeah...look for Kipper to be traded within the next two seasons, everyone!

[NeverForgetMac25 483]

Let's just do Ovechkin

Offensive skill-Ovechkin

Shot-Ovechkin

Speed-Ovechkin

Physicality-Ovechkin

Strength-Ovechkin

Age-Ovechkin

Let's see, gofigure that Ovechkin would have more offensive skill, a better shot or speed then Lidstrom. He's plays *offense*. There are tons of players that have more "offensive skill", a better shot or speed than Lidstrom, but that doesn't make them a better *player*. If you're going to make arguments based on that, I could bring up categories such as "Defensive Skill, PP management (QB'ing), Positional Posturing, Reading the Ice, etc." Aside from the last point, is that fair to bring up, because there are tons of Defensemen that blow AO out of the water in those departments.

Strength/Physicality is kind of a moot argument between AO and Lidstrom simply because Nick doesn't play that style of hockey (and part of the reason Lids is so durable -- he doesn't put himself in situations where he goes down for periods of time). I could say Lidstrom is smarter than AO (which by the way...he is 10-fold) because he doesn't put himself in the position to take the physical toll on his body that someone like AO does.

The key here is the *all-around* hockey player. Lids just put up 70 points the following season (showing his massive offensive skill at the defensive position), plays better defense and reads the game far superior to anyone in the world, and is quietly (and most likely) the best leader in the game right now.

Let's just do Ovechkin

Offensive skill-Ovechkin

Shot-Ovechkin

Speed-Ovechkin

Physicality-Ovechkin

Strength-Ovechkin

Age-Ovechkin

Listrom is nearing 40 years of age.

For the last time, Age has nothing to do with this list whatsoever. This is about who is the best player in the league/world *right now*. It doesn't matter if AO is younger, that point is moot given the circumstances of this list.

Everybody says that Ozzie looks better b/c he's surrounded by a great supporting cast. Everyone says that about every Wings player except for Lidstrom. Like he's some goddamn infallible God. You put Nick Lidstrom on the Columbus Blue Jackets and you will not see him win any Norris trophy. Now you put AO on any team in the league and he's going to challenge for the scoring title.

Lids doesn't win the Norris on the Blue Jackets... Why is it that everybody that plays alongside Lidstrom always magically has career years? There's a reason for it.

PS: And why is it only so definitive that Lidstrom is the best coming from Wings fans. What, like Wings fans are the only people in the know about NHL players? Is everybody on the THN staff so incompetent that they haven't named Nick the best player the past 5 years straight? Please, the amount of homerism/arrogance bandied about LGW when it comes to their own has almost reached Canuck fanboy status at times.

Because way too many fans simply look at things such as who lead the league in scoring and assume that makes them the best player in the league. Far from it.

Don't put words in my mouth in regards to THN's competence or lack-there-of. I never ripped them apart of called them stupid for their picks. I just don't agree with it. It's easy to look at a scoring title and state that that individual is the "best" player in the game. It can also be short-sighted.

[toby91_ca 620]

They probably left Osgood completely off the list despite the fact he was a Vezina contender and the best goalie in the playoffs, too, but likely included Miikka Kiprusoff and his stellar 2.69 GAA, .906 save percentage, and stats that have declined every year with Calgary; just as they did every year with San Jose. So yeah...look for Kipper to be traded within the next two seasons, everyone!

Are you saying Osgood would be on your top 50 list? I'm not an Osgood basher, but he wouldn't be on my top 50 and I also don't think you can definitively say he was the best goalie in the playoffs, I think there would be a healthy argument between him and Fleury. I might lean towards Fleury, who had the slight edge in save percentage, the other stats are more team oriented (sv % is to an extent, but not as much as the others).

Also, I'm not sure I'd say Osgood was a Vezina contender, he only received 1 third place vote, leaving 10 other goalies ahead of him.

[toby91_ca 620]

*double post

Edited September 4, 2008 by toby91_ca

[eva unit zero 271]

Are you saying Osgood would be on your top 50 list? I'm not an Osgood basher, but he wouldn't be on my top 50 and I also don't think you can definitively say he was the best goalie in the playoffs, I think there would be a healthy argument between him and Fleury. I might lean towards Fleury, who had the slight edge in save percentage, the other stats are more team oriented (sv % is to an extent, but not as much as the others).

Also, I'm not sure I'd say Osgood was a Vezina contender, he only received 1 third place vote, leaving 10 other goalies ahead of him.

I suppose Vezina contender was the wrong term. One of the league's top goalies would have been beter, as he finished seventh in voting for the postseason All-Star team. Of course, even the people who vote for those sometimes make mistakes; How does Miikka Kiprusoff end up 6th for All-Star team and 5th for Vezina WITH A FIRST PLACE VOTE with the kind of season he has last year? It boggles the mind.

[toby91_ca 620]

Mikael Samuelsson got Selke votes? Ok Eva, you've basically just tossed my entire universe into upheaval. I'm going to have to take a break for a bit and try to rationalize what just happened.

I think Eva misstyped, he didn't get "several" selke votes, he got 1, 5th place vote, good for 1 pt (which compares to Datsyuk's 537 pts). Rick Nash also got a vote.

[eva unit zero 271]

I think Eva misstyped, he didn't get "several" selke votes, he got 1, 5th place vote, good for 1 pt (which compares to Datsyuk's 537 pts). Rick Nash also got a vote.

Gimme a break, I just woke up a little while ago.

But he was initially signed as a defensive specialist, and tied Kirk Maltby, whose only purpose on the team is his defensive ability.

As far as Rick Nash getting a 5th place Selke vote...that's just sad. Rick Nash is not one of the top 120 defensive forwards in the NHL, let alone one of the top 5. Yes, he plays the PK for Columbus...but only because despite his terrible defensive play he is still one of their best options at forward because their roster is so terrible. Samuelsson would play first-unit PK for Columbus if he were a Jacket.

EDIT: I also find it interesting that Nash received a 5th place vote...but Peca received no votes. Odd at the very least, given that Peca is the best defensive forward to end the season in Columbus by a WIDE margin, yet Nash was the only Jacket forward to be mentioned by Selke voters.

Edited September 4, 2008 by eva unit zero

[toby91_ca 620]

Gimme a break, I just woke up a little while ago.

But he was initially signed as a defensive specialist, and tied Kirk Maltby, whose only purpose on the team is his defensive ability.

As far as Rick Nash getting a 5th place Selke vote...that's just sad. Rick Nash is not one of the top 120 defensive forwards in the NHL, let alone one of the top 5. Yes, he plays the PK for Columbus...but only because despite his terrible defensive play he is still one of their best options at forward because their roster is so terrible. Samuelsson would play first-unit PK for Columbus if he were a Jacket.

EDIT: I also find it interesting that Nash received a 5th place vote...but Peca received no votes. Odd at the very least, given that Peca is the best defensive forward to end the season in Columbus by a WIDE margin, yet Nash was the only Jacket forward to be mentioned by Selke voters.

It's also interesting that Staal only received 1, 4th place vote. If you speak to a Pens fans, they would probably tell you he should be a Selke contender. He is great defensively, but the voters probably just figure he's young, needs more experience, etc.

[Torless 0]

...I also don't think you can definitively say he was the best goalie in the playoffs, I think there would be a healthy argument between him and Fleury. I might lean towards Fleury, who had the slight edge in save percentage, the other stats are more team oriented (sv % is to an extent, but not as much as the others).

If you're comparing the two goaltenders to see who performed better during the playoffs, you can't really compare them other than the times when their teams played each other. Osgood clearly won this battle... and he wasn't the one to put in the cup winning goal with his ass, btw.

Ozzie sv% vs. PIT: .9295

Fleury sv% vs. DET: .9234

And Ozzie beat him in sv% despite the fact that it's arguably more difficult the less action you see per game... two shutouts on the East's top offensive team? Point blank saves on just about all of their top guns?

When is mental toughness going to be a stat, btw - how many goalies can bounce back like Osgood did from a loss at home to perform to their best? Did anyone check out Ozzie's road stats for the 2007 season? His away save percentage was above .930 - higher than all the other top league goaltenders. Not getting his dues is the name of the game for Ozzie now... and will be as long as he has the top team in front of him.

[eva unit zero 271]

It's also interesting that Staal only received 1, 4th place vote. If you speak to a Pens fans, they would probably tell you he should be a Selke contender. He is great defensively, but the voters probably just figure he's young, needs more experience, etc.

The thing about the Selke is this:

How does a forward compare with his teammates defensively?

How then, do his teammates compare with the league defensively?

If a forward is 'average' for his team, and his team is 'average' when compared to the league...he probably shouldn't be getting Selke votes. As far as Staal's case...part of the reason he gets so much praise is his age. He's very good defensively for his age; but I wouldn't call him one of the top five defensive forwards in the league. Granted, most of the guys who managed to get on someone's ballot I wouldn't call that. But when you have past finalists like Modano, Fedorov, Draper, Brind'Amour, and Conroy having solid seasons defensively and only being mentioned on a few ballots...I wouldn't expect a guy like Staal who isn't setting him apart from them to get anything more than one or two votes himself. I'll further note that two-thirds of the first place votes are accounted for by the finalists, half of the second place votes went to the top five, half of the third place votes went to the top 8 vote-getters, half of the 4th place votes went within the top 10, and half of the 5th place votes were gone within the top 13. If you expand it out to the top 30, you get all but three first place votes (a 3-way tie at 35th, each player with 1 first place vote and nothing else) then you have your list of Selke contenders and players who can be considered 'Number One' defensive forwards for this past season.

So as for Pens fans saying Staal should be a Selke contender...he will be. He's very good defensively for his age...but if they think he's as good defensively as Z or Dats...no. As for a comparison to Wings forwards, he's probably somewhere between Franzen and Maltby. Which is right where he was in Selke voting compared to Wings forwards.

[Guest GordieSid&Ted]

Let's see, gofigure that Ovechkin would have more offensive skill, a better shot or speed then Lidstrom. He's plays *offense*. There are tons of players that have more "offensive skill", a better shot or speed than Lidstrom, but that doesn't make them a better *player*. If you're going to make arguments based on that, I could bring up categories such as "Defensive Skill, PP management (QB'ing), Positional Posturing, Reading the Ice, etc." Aside from the last point, is that fair to bring up, because there are tons of Defensemen that blow AO out of the water in those departments.

Strength/Physicality is kind of a moot argument between AO and Lidstrom simply because Nick doesn't play that style of hockey (and part of the reason Lids is so durable -- he doesn't put himself in situations where he goes down for periods of time). I could say Lidstrom is smarter than AO (which by the way...he is 10-fold) because he doesn't put himself in the position to take the physical toll on his body that someone like AO does.

The key here is the *all-around* hockey player. Lids just put up 70 points the following season (showing his massive offensive skill at the defensive position), plays better defense and reads the game far superior to anyone in the world, and is quietly (and most likely) the best leader in the game right now.

For the last time, Age has nothing to do with this list whatsoever. This is about who is the best player in the league/world *right now*. It doesn't matter if AO is younger, that point is moot given the circumstances of this list.

Lids doesn't win the Norris on the Blue Jackets... Why is it that everybody that plays alongside Lidstrom always magically has career years? There's a reason for it.

Because way too many fans simply look at things such as who lead the league in scoring and assume that makes them the best player in the league. Far from it.

Don't put words in my mouth in regards to THN's competence or lack-there-of. I never ripped them apart of called them stupid for their picks. I just don't agree with it. It's easy to look at a scoring title and state that that individual is the "best" player in the game. It can also be short-sighted.

Mac, we're going around in circles for no good reason. I think the league is geared towards offense. I think if I need a goal to win a game then the best guy to get that goal is Ovechkin. I think as far as the complete package of offensive skills goes, the complete package, which includes physicality and age whether you like it or not makes, AO the best player in the league IMO. It's only my opinion.

Yeah, people have career years playing with Nick. And in a broader sense, people have career years when they put on a Wings sweater surrounded by Wings talent. Nick Lidstrom is not the sole reason why the Wings are great. And Nick Lidstrom's greatness is due in some part to being surrounded by great teammates.

AO, you stick him in Columbus he'll still get 50 goals. He's my pick.

[NeverForgetMac25 483]

Mac, we're going around in circles for no good reason.

Agreed

AO, you stick him in Columbus he'll still get 50 goals. He's my pick.

Lids, you stick him in Columbus he'll still win the Norris. He's my pick.

[Guest GordieSid&Ted]

Agreed

Lids, you stick him in Columbus he'll still win the Norris. He's my pick.

Well, I guess we'll never know as I don't see either of them going elsewhere.

Honestly though, you think Nick would be able to put up the kind of numbers at both ends of the ice that would get him a Norris whilst playing for such a mediocre/average team?

I have a hard time seeing anybody in a BJ's sweater be in contention for a Norris. There's just not enough talent around that person to give them the numbers that the voters look at. I've seen goal scorers still score goals on offensively s***ty teams (see Iginla). But i've not seen anybody really be in contention for the Norris on a non-playoff team. I don't even think Nick could do it.

[eva unit zero 271]

Well, I guess we'll never know as I don't see either of them going elsewhere.

Honestly though, you think Nick would be able to put up the kind of numbers at both ends of the ice that would get him a Norris whilst playing for such a mediocre/average team?

I have a hard time seeing anybody in a BJ's sweater be in contention for a Norris. There's just not enough talent around that person to give them the numbers that the voters look at. I've seen goal scorers still score goals on offensively s***ty teams (see Iginla). But i've not seen anybody really be in contention for the Norris on a non-playoff team. I don't even think Nick could do it.

This has more to do with the fact that the Norris is treated the same way the Hart is with regards to the playoffs; because many writers sort of view the Hart as a 'Best Forward' award.

If the NHL added an award for 'Most Outstanding Forward' that was similar to the Norris and Vezina, I bet Hart voting starts to include many more defensemen and goaltenders, and truly excellent players on non-playoff teams start to get a bit more consideration if they aren't getting it. Guys like Tomas Kaberle, who is one of the very best defensemen in the league.

That said...Nicklas Lidstrom on Columbus would still win the Norris. Perhaps not every year, but the fact that he's without a doubt one of the five best defensemen in the NHL at both ends of the ice is enough to say that he would still be capable of contending for the Norris every season. The only season recently where he didn't win the Norris came when his offensive production dipped due to the fact that he was playing a defensive safeguard role with Mathieu Schneider. Columbus would not be able to stack two guys with that much offensive talent on the same pairing.

[toby91_ca 620]

Always easier to be a goal scoring forward than a Dman preventing the opposition from scoring;

I think that is debatable, especially in today's NHL (very little scoring).

To be a goal scorer, you really need the skill, you either have it or you don't. Practice will help, but you need that god given ability. You can't teach someone to be the best defender in the world, but you can definately learn defense a lot easier than learning how to score goals.

[Guest GordieSid&Ted]

I think that is debatable, especially in today's NHL (very little scoring).

To be a goal scorer, you really need the skill, you either have it or you don't. Practice will help, but you need that god given ability. You can't teach someone to be the best defender in the world, but you can definately learn defense a lot easier than learning how to score goals.

Agreed. Your assessment is a big part of the reason why I chose AO versus Nick. Simply, you can teach people defense a hell of alot easier.

Essentially, I think, and this has been witnessed by all of us, that an average goalie or dman or defense corps can be made to look like the Steel Curtain. An average or slightly above average dman like a Greg Zanon can absolutely play out of his mind and shut down another team. Its happened to the Wings alot, especially in the playoffs. It's much easier to teach somebody to block a shot than to score on a breakaway.

What you can't teach is God given speed and killer offensive instincts.

That being said, no I don't think you can turn Greg Zanon into Nick Lidstrom in the defensive zone. However, having played defense my entire life and knowing just a tad bit about it, Nick Lidstrom is not miles ahead of every other dman in the league in the defensive zone alone. There are many fantastic dmen in their own zone. They may not do it as effortlessly as Nick but they're still a bunch of good ones out there. For me, Nick's offense does not mean anything to me in the equation of who is best. Nick doesn't come close offensively to AO. Likewise AO isn't 1/10th the defensive player that Nick is. But I can teach somebody defense easier than I can teach them to bag goals.

Right now AO is the most valuable/best player in the game. Nick would be the 1st dman and probably in the 3-6 range on my list.

[eva unit zero 271]

Agreed. Your assessment is a big part of the reason why I chose AO versus Nick. Simply, you can teach people defense a hell of alot easier.

Essentially, I think, and this has been witnessed by all of us, that an average goalie or dman or defense corps can be made to look like the Steel Curtain. An average or slightly above average dman like a Greg Zanon can absolutely play out of his mind and shut down another team. Its happened to the Wings alot, especially in the playoffs. It's much easier to teach somebody to block a shot than to score on a breakaway.

What you can't teach is God given speed and killer offensive instincts.

That being said, no I don't think you can turn Greg Zanon into Nick Lidstrom in the defensive zone. However, having played defense my entire life and knowing just a tad bit about it, Nick Lidstrom is not miles ahead of every other dman in the league in the defensive zone alone. There are many fantastic dmen in their own zone. They may not do it as effortlessly as Nick but they're still a bunch of good ones out there. For me, Nick's offense does not mean anything to me in the equation of who is best. Nick doesn't come close offensively to AO. Likewise AO isn't 1/10th the defensive player that Nick is. But I can teach somebody defense easier than I can teach them to bag goals.

Right now AO is the most valuable/best player in the game. Nick would be the 1st dman and probably in the 3-6 range on my list.

Your argument fails, and here's why.

You are saying because it's easier to teach players to be solid defensively than it is to teach them to be solid offensively, that RIGHT NOW a player who is the league's top defensive player and one of the league's best offensive players is not as good as a player who is the league's best offensive player and a BELOW AVERAGE defensive player.

I'm not saying that you can't rank AO above Nick. I'm just saying that 'Defense is easier to teach' or 'AO is younger' aren't valid reasons for ranking AO ahead of Nick because neither of those have a bearing on how they would perform on the ice TODAY. If we're building a team, sure. But this is a 'who's the best player right now' list, not a 'who is going to be the best in five years' list.

[Reds4Life 51]

Nick Lidstrom is not miles ahead of every other dman in the league in the defensive zone alone. There are many fantastic dmen in their own zone. They may not do it as effortlessly as Nick but they're still a bunch of good ones out there. For me, Nick's offense does not mean anything to me in the equation of who is best. Nick doesn't come close offensively to AO. Likewise AO isn't 1/10th the defensive player that Nick is. But I can teach somebody defense easier than I can teach them to bag goals.

What the hell does that mean? Defence is always way more important than offense. You can teach someone to be good defensive player..so what? How does that make offensively gifted player more valuable? Ovechkin would never score 60 goals if he was forced to play good defence.

Right now AO is the most valuable/best player in the game. Nick would be the 1st dman and probably in the 3-6 range on my list.

Yeah..in some fantasy league..sure.

[Guest GordieSid&Ted]

Your argument fails, and here's why.

You are saying because it's easier to teach players to be solid defensively than it is to teach them to be solid offensively, that RIGHT NOW a player who is the league's top defensive player and one of the league's best offensive players is not as good as a player who is the league's best offensive player and a BELOW AVERAGE defensive player.

I'm not saying that you can't rank AO above Nick. I'm just saying that 'Defense is easier to teach' or 'AO is younger' aren't valid reasons for ranking AO ahead of Nick because neither of those have a bearing on how they would perform on the ice TODAY. If we're building a team, sure. But this is a 'who's the best player right now' list, not a 'who is going to be the best in five years' list.

Eva, you're missing the point. And since you miss the point I don't give much credit to your position that my argument is a failure.

Let me make is as simplistic for you as possible. There are a multitude of defenseman in the NHL that can hunker down and become walls in their own zone. Yes, there are many of them that are great in the defensive zone. So great that the gap between them and Nick is miniscule. Hence, I don't put near as much stock into Nick's defensive game as you do b/c there are many players that can play top flight defense.

Now, how many guys can go out and score 60+ goals for you? Who is the last person that scored 60+ goals?

How good Nick is offensively means nothing to me b/c his offense pales in comparison to AO's. How good AO's defense is means nothing to me b/c it pales in comparison to Nicks.

HOWEVER, I CAN FIND SOMEBODY TO PLAY D MUCH CLOSER TO NICK'S LEVEL THAN I CAN FIND SOMEBODY TO SCORE GOALS ON AO's LEVEL. And yes, I'm yelling so as to make it abundantly clear what the hell i'm trying to convey to you.

You don't have to like my argument. But let's face it. My saying I can find somebody to replace Nick's defense easier than AO's offense is purely opinion and therefore there is no right or wrong, success or failure in it.

[Guest GordieSid&Ted]

What the hell does that mean? Defence is always way more important than offense. You can teach someone to be good defensive player..so what? How does that make offensively gifted player more valuable? Ovechkin would never score 60 goals if he was forced to play good defence.

Yeah..in some fantasy league..sure.

If you think Defense is more important that's fine. If people think Nick is the best, that is fine too. I disagree with that and have stated why. But its merely my opinion, not something i'm pawning off as God's given truth.

So before you lose your s*** about it take a breath before you type.

Edited September 8, 2008 by GordieSid&Ted

[eva unit zero 271]

Eva, you're missing the point. And since you miss the point I don't give much credit to your position that my argument is a failure.

Let me make is as simplistic for you as possible. There are a multitude of defenseman in the NHL that can hunker down and become walls in their own zone. Yes, there are many of them that are great in the defensive zone. So great that the gap between them and Nick is miniscule. Hence, I don't put near as much stock into Nick's defensive game as you do b/c there are many players that can play top flight defense.

Now, how many guys can go out and score 60+ goals for you? Who is the last person that scored 60+ goals?

How good Nick is offensively means nothing to me b/c his offense pales in comparison to AO's. How good AO's defense is means nothing to me b/c it pales in comparison to Nicks.

HOWEVER, I CAN FIND SOMEBODY TO PLAY D MUCH CLOSER TO NICK'S LEVEL THAN I CAN FIND SOMEBODY TO SCORE GOALS ON AO's LEVEL. And yes, I'm yelling so as to make it abundantly clear what the hell i'm trying to convey to you.

You don't have to like my argument. But let's face it. My saying I can find somebody to replace Nick's defense easier than AO's offense is purely opinion and therefore there is no right or wrong, success or failure in it.

Ok, let me put this another way...

How far ahead of the nearest three at their position were Ovechkin and Lidstrom in scoring?

Ovechkin is an average of 11.7 points, or 10.4% Lidstrom is an average of 7 points ahead, or 10.0%. Not too terribly different. Ovechkin's might even be lower if Crosby had been healthy. Are you going to sit there and tell me that Ovechkin's MINOR advantage in offense negates Lidstrom's HUGE advantage in defense?

I'll remind you of something: Ovechkin is below average to average defensively. Most of the league's top defensive defensemen are below average offensively and are defensive specialists. Lidstrom is special because he is elite at both ends of the ice.

[Guest GordieSid&Ted]

Ok, let me put this another way...

How far ahead of the nearest three at their position were Ovechkin and Lidstrom in scoring?

Ovechkin is an average of 11.7 points, or 10.4% Lidstrom is an average of 7 points ahead, or 10.0%. Not too terribly different. Ovechkin's might even be lower if Crosby had been healthy. Are you going to sit there and tell me that Ovechkin's MINOR advantage in offense negates Lidstrom's HUGE advantage in defense?

I'll remind you of something: Ovechkin is below average to average defensively. Most of the league's top defensive defensemen are below average offensively and are defensive specialists. Lidstrom is special because he is elite at both ends of the ice.

Eva, to be fair I never said my pick of AO was based on offense. I said it was based on goal scoring.

So your numbers have no meaning in this conversation. You got the wrong figures.

Goals, AO is an average of 15.3 goals ahead of the next 3 closest guys. In regards to Nick, 19, yes NINETEEN defenseman had more goals than Lidstrom last year.

Look, you want to look at Nick's overall game and say he's the best. That's fine, b/c he does everything better than any other dman. Personally, I think, and the stats bare this out, that there are many dmen that could replace Nick's offense and many that could replace his defense. There isn't really 1 that could do both equally as well but Phaneuf and Chara, even Chris Pronger come to mind. IMO, you can't replace an AO. Nobody is even close to him in the goal scoring department.

IMO, its easier to prevent goals than it is to score them. You can't teach what AO does.

For what its worth this is only my opinion. You're not going to convince me any more than I am you. I like your pick of Lidstrom, just not as much as my pick. Leave it at that.

[NeverForgetMac25 483]

Well, I guess we'll never know as I don't see either of them going elsewhere.

Honestly though, you think Nick would be able to put up the kind of numbers at both ends of the ice that would get him a Norris whilst playing for such a mediocre/average team?

I have a hard time seeing anybody in a BJ's sweater be in contention for a Norris. There's just not enough talent around that person to give them the numbers that the voters look at. I've seen goal scorers still score goals on offensively s***ty teams (see Iginla). But i've not seen anybody really be in contention for the Norris on a non-playoff team. I don't even think Nick could do it.

No doubt it would be harder for Nick to get numbers in a BJ's sweater, but its not as if he wouldn't put up points. If you look at last seasons' Goals For, Detroit had 252 while Columbus had 190. Now, obviously you can't just take away 10 goals from Detroit's total and add it to Columbus' and say that they're now within 42 total goals of each other. Thats to simplistic of a way to look at things. However, what you can assume is that Nick would be far more heavily relied on in a BJ sweater than he would be in Detroit simply due to the depth the Wings have in comparison to the Jackets. Now, assuming his role becomes greatly increased one could conceivably assume his numbers could possibly as well. Be it taking the line and shooting more or playing more minutes than he currently does. Bottom line is that we can't say with 100% certainty, but I have a feeling he'd be just fine in Columbus.

[Guest GordieSid&Ted]

No doubt it would be harder for Nick to get numbers in a BJ's sweater, but its not as if he wouldn't put up points. If you look at last seasons' Goals For, Detroit had 252 while Columbus had 190. Now, obviously you can't just take away 10 goals from Detroit's total and add it to Columbus' and say that they're now within 42 total goals of each other. Thats to simplistic of a way to look at things. However, what you can assume is that Nick would be far more heavily relied on in a BJ sweater than he would be in Detroit simply due to the depth the Wings have in comparison to the Jackets. Now, assuming his role becomes greatly increased one could conceivably assume his numbers could possibly as well. Be it taking the line and shooting more or playing more minutes than he currently does. Bottom line is that we can't say with 100% certainty, but I have a feeling he'd be just fine in Columbus.

Hypothetically speaking I agree with your thoughts. He very well could put up nice numbers.

On the flip side though, you are also talking about a BJ's team with a seriously defensive-minded coach in Hitchcock. You're talking about a team with very little offensive talent and even worse defensive talent. In my mind, Nick being a dman and all, no matter if his playing time were increased or he was "more heavliy relied upon" I think first and foremost he'd be focused on defense. That could mean he's less likely to jump into plays, and being that the talent is not there on the forward lines, his setups aren't going to Dats and Z or Rafs or to nice 2nd tier guys who can finish like Homer and Franzen. They're going to guys, other than Nash, that haven't really proven to be big time scorers.

If Nick could play 82 games with the current BJ's roster. I wouldn't be surprised if his numbers looked like this: 16 goals (he'd be shooting more b/c frankly he'd be the most dangerous guy out there other than Nash), 42 assists (way down due to lack of finishers up front) and maybe a +12. Those would be fantastic numbers on a BJ's team. Enough for a Norris vote? Maybe, maybe not.

Anyway, thank God we have him and the BJ's don't.