Phazon 24 Report post Posted May 22, 2009 http://www.hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=644241 imo lidstrom has a better career then Jagr in terms of longevity and stanley cups. Jagr had a few down seasons in capitals and rangers. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Reds4Life 51 Report post Posted May 22, 2009 WTF is this? HFBoards have nothing to do with LGW. Besides, case can be made for all of those 3 as the best European player ever. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest micah Report post Posted May 22, 2009 3 way tie: Uwe Krupp, Petr Klima and Kristof Oliwa. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Datsyerberger 279 Report post Posted May 22, 2009 As much as I love Lids, I've gotta give this one to Hasek. Hasek is to goalies as Orr is to d-men... pure frigging dominance over everyone else, even other top guys (Roy, Brodeur) in the peak of their career. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
theman19 47 Report post Posted May 22, 2009 As much as I love Lids, I've gotta give this one to Hasek. Hasek is to goalies as Orr is to d-men... pure frigging dominance over everyone else, even other top guys (Roy, Brodeur) in the peak of their career. You're going to have a really hard time selling anyone that. Plus the same can be said for lidstrom, after all he does possess a stupid string of norris trophies. That's not even going into the era of Defense we're currently in is often refered to as; "The Lidstrom era". Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Reds4Life 51 Report post Posted May 22, 2009 You're going to have a really hard time selling anyone that. Why? Most hockey historians think that Hasek/Roy/Plante are the best goalies of all-time. Brodeur is not really close to them. And Lidstrom is not better than Orr, that's for sure. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
C-TownWing 0 Report post Posted May 22, 2009 As much as I love Lids, I've gotta give this one to Hasek. Hasek is to goalies as Orr is to d-men... pure frigging dominance over everyone else, even other top guys (Roy, Brodeur) in the peak of their career. REALLY tough one. Lids and Hasek are both the best I've ever seen at their positions, although to be fair, I'm only going back about 20 years or so. Jagr isn't, so he's automatically 3rd in that one. I'll be a homer and say Lids, but really you could flip a coin IMO. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
T-Ruff 47 Report post Posted May 22, 2009 The poll is pretty much right IMO.... Hasek out in front then Lidstrom and Jagr not far behind.... Hasek is the greatest goalie of all time, Lidstrom could be #2 at best when all is said and done, Jagr loses points for phoning it in during the Washington years, but even if he hadn't Hasek and Lidstrom are still better... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
VM1138 1,921 Report post Posted May 22, 2009 The poll is pretty much right IMO.... Hasek out in front then Lidstrom and Jagr not far behind.... Hasek is the greatest goalie of all time, Lidstrom could be #2 at best when all is said and done, Jagr loses points for phoning it in during the Washington years, but even if he hadn't Hasek and Lidstrom are still better... Jagr was lazy and sucks. He put up good numbers but I don't think numbers alone make you the greatest. You've got to have ita ll, and Lidstrom has that. Hasek was probably the best at his position, but it's hard to say a goalie is the greatest type of player ever considering their limited, though crucial, role. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
P. Marlowe 748 Report post Posted May 22, 2009 Funny how all those players' pro careers are from 90's and 00's (well, Hasek was a league MVP in Czech Republic already in late 80's). When you think about all time greatest North American players you have to consider ones like Howe, Orr and Richard. This poll has quite a NA view in it as before 90's there weren't many Europeans in the NHL. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
egroen 384 Report post Posted May 22, 2009 1) Hasek 2) Lidstrom 3) Jagr Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bellarina 1 Report post Posted May 22, 2009 Why? Most hockey historians think that Hasek/Roy/Plante are the best goalies of all-time. Brodeur is not really close to them. And Lidstrom is not better than Orr, that's for sure. Whoaaaa Cheval!!! In my opinion Lidstrom is much better than Orr. If Orr played in these last 15 years he would have been smoked. Orr was amazing for his day but today the players are bigger and faster. Orr was a thing of beauty to watch, he really was. He was like having a forth forward out there. If Lidstrom played back then you would have an indication of how good he is next to Orr. I don't think Orr would have 8 Norris trophies. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
egroen 384 Report post Posted May 22, 2009 (edited) Whoaaaa Cheval!!! In my opinion Lidstrom is much better than Orr. If Orr played in these last 15 years he would have been smoked. Orr was amazing for his day but today the players are bigger and faster. Orr was a thing of beauty to watch, he really was. He was like having a forth forward out there. If Lidstrom played back then you would have an indication of how good he is next to Orr. I don't think Orr would have 8 Norris trophies. It is utterly asinine to compare today's players directly to players of the past. Instead you have to compare their accomlishments relative to their peers of the era. Someone like you would state Brandon Inge is much better than Babe Ruth, right? Edited May 22, 2009 by egroen Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NGKEIB 32 Report post Posted May 22, 2009 Whoaaaa Cheval!!! In my opinion Lidstrom is much better than Orr. If Orr played in these last 15 years he would have been smoked. Orr was amazing for his day but today the players are bigger and faster. Orr was a thing of beauty to watch, he really was. He was like having a forth forward out there. If Lidstrom played back then you would have an indication of how good he is next to Orr. I don't think Orr would have 8 Norris trophies. I'm not sure if that's a totally fair way to look at it... Orr dominated his era more than Lidström does this one, and revolutionised a position. You need to see the players in their contexts... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
theman19 47 Report post Posted May 22, 2009 (edited) Why? Most hockey historians think that Hasek/Roy/Plante are the best goalies of all-time. Brodeur is not really close to them. And Lidstrom is not better than Orr, that's for sure. Most hockey historians? Most is a strong word,..i'd say most red wings fans put hasek up there myself included, if this was a general board as apposed to a wings board you'd hear people scaff at the thought of hasek being with roy/plante being among the best. Where's sawchuk? Dryden? it's all a matter of perspective. Personaly I think when Lids finally hangs him up he'll be 2nd best all time behind orr, I still say being the first european captain to ever win the cup puts him above jagr and hasek now. Edited May 22, 2009 by theman19 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
egroen 384 Report post Posted May 22, 2009 Most hockey historians? Most is a strong word,..i'd say most red wings fans put hasek up there myself included, if this was a general board as apposed to a wings board you'd hear people scaff at the thought of hasek being with roy/plante being among the best. Where's sawchuk? Dryden? it's all a matter of perspective. Personaly I think when Lids finally hangs him up he'll be 2nd best all time behind orr, I still say being the first european captain to ever win the cup puts him above jagr and hasek now. No -- most would definitely put Hasek up there with Roy and Plante -- with Sawchuk and Hall rounding them out and Brodeur and Dryden a bit of a step below. Hasek had longevity (especially if you consider his time stuck in Czechoslovakia) as well as the best peak ever - comparable only by Sawchuk. He is actually older than Roy, and destroys him in all categories but Conn Smythes and Cup wins. Once Hasek became a starter in the NHL, Roy never won a Vezina again. The teams they played for might have more than a bit to do with that. Orr, Shore and Harvey are all solidly ahead of Lidstrom according to most ranking I have looked at. Bourque has a strong case for being ahead of Lidstrom as well - but I think Lidstrm is better than the rest, including Potvin. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GMRwings1983 8,794 Report post Posted May 22, 2009 Who's to say Hasek is the best European goalie ever? Tretiak was a legendary goalie in his own right. In fact, there's many great players from the Red Army team that never got to play in the NHL, which makes it harder to compare all the European players together. I'd say that post 80's, Lidstrom is definitely the best European player ever in my opinion. 15+ seasons of playing around 100 total games a season, playing 25 or more minutes of ice time during that stretch, and against the best players on the other team no less. Not to mention, he's done it all at a high level, and for the last 10 years he's been the best in the league at it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bellarina 1 Report post Posted May 22, 2009 It is utterly asinine to compare today's players directly to players of the past. Instead you have to compare their accomlishments relative to their peers of the era. Someone like you would state Brandon Inge is much better than Babe Ruth, right? It may be asinine to compare players from different eras, but unfortunately If you had read and understood my post it said my OPINION, and that is also why I wrote "If Lidstrom played back then you would have an indication of how good he is next to Orr. and Brandon who??? doesn't matter baseball is lame. Don't bother replying egroen I won't come back to read your response. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
theman19 47 Report post Posted May 22, 2009 No -- most would definitely put Hasek up there with Roy and Plante -- with Sawchuk and Hall rounding them out and Brodeur and Dryden a bit of a step below. Hasek had longevity (especially if you consider his time stuck in Czechoslovakia) as well as the best peak ever - comparable only by Sawchuk. He is actually older than Roy, and destroys him in all categories but Conn Smythes and Cup wins. Once Hasek became a starter in the NHL, Roy never won a Vezina again. The teams they played for might have more than a bit to do with that. Orr, Shore and Harvey are all solidly ahead of Lidstrom according to most ranking I have looked at. Bourque has a strong case for being ahead of Lidstrom as well - but I think Lidstrm is better than the rest, including Potvin. We'll agree to disagree but I find your arrogence in your assumptions lessons the impact of your argument. There really isn't an "authority" that you can point too that makes you right or me wrong (or vise versa) as i've said it's a matter of persepctive. It's an opinion. If you go purely by numbers and factor in nothing else the argument takes an entirly different take. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GMRwings1983 8,794 Report post Posted May 22, 2009 No -- most would definitely put Hasek up there with Roy and Plante -- with Sawchuk and Hall rounding them out and Brodeur and Dryden a bit of a step below. Hasek had longevity (especially if you consider his time stuck in Czechoslovakia) as well as the best peak ever - comparable only by Sawchuk. He is actually older than Roy, and destroys him in all categories but Conn Smythes and Cup wins. Once Hasek became a starter in the NHL, Roy never won a Vezina again. The teams they played for might have more than a bit to do with that. Orr, Shore and Harvey are all solidly ahead of Lidstrom according to most ranking I have looked at. Bourque has a strong case for being ahead of Lidstrom as well - but I think Lidstrm is better than the rest, including Potvin. Do you really think Eddie Shore would be better in today's league than Lidstrom currently is? Lidstrom in my opinion would dominate Eddie Shore's era if he was to go back in time and play in it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hossa7.4 0 Report post Posted May 22, 2009 Do you really think Eddie Shore would be better in today's league than Lidstrom currently is? Lidstrom in my opinion would dominate Eddie Shore's era if he was to go back in time and play in it. lidstrom is not nearly physical enough to dominate eddie shore's era. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
egroen 384 Report post Posted May 22, 2009 (edited) Do you really think Eddie Shore would be better in today's league than Lidstrom currently is? Lidstrom in my opinion would dominate Eddie Shore's era if he was to go back in time and play in it. I'm not going to argue if we magically transported a 30 year-old Shore into the present, that he would be better than Lidstrom -- I am arguing, based on his accomlishments against the best hockey players in the world at the time, that if he was born in 1979, and had all the modern training, equipment and nutrition that today's players have enjoyed -- chances are, he would dominate today's game as well. Mathieu Dandenault would dominate Shore's era if we teleported him back in time to play in it -- so what? Edited May 22, 2009 by egroen Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GMRwings1983 8,794 Report post Posted May 22, 2009 I'm not going to argue if we magically transported a 30 year-old Shore into the present, that he would be better than Lidstrom -- I am arguing, based on his accomlishments against the best hockey players in the world at the time, that if he was born in 1979, and had all the modern training, equipment and nutrition that today's players have enjoyed -- chances are, he would dominate today's game as well. Mathieu Dandenault would dominate Shore's era if we teleported him back in time to play in it -- so what? But hockey wasn't as global and widespread during Shore's era, in order for his dominance to be somehow superior to Lidstrom's. It was a 6 team NHL and all the players were Canadians. Also, they didn't have to play the same amount of games and go through the same rigorous schedule and competition. I just think it's too hard to determine these types of comparisons without sounding silly or wildly hypothetical. Even I'm starting to do it now. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
egroen 384 Report post Posted May 22, 2009 But hockey wasn't as global and widespread during Shore's era, in order for his dominance to be somehow superior to Lidstrom's. It was a 6 team NHL and all the players were Canadians. Also, they didn't have to play the same amount of games and go through the same rigorous schedule and competition. I just think it's too hard to determine these types of comparisons without sounding silly or wildly hypothetical. Even I'm starting to do it now. The league is still over 70% North American -- with europeans and simply increased population in N. America, the hockey population has increased about 5 fold since the Original 6 era. There are now thirty teams (uhhh, Phoenix pending), exactly 5 times the NHL teams from the Original 6 era (though there are also more players per team). This is the first time since the league first expanded that the league has even approached being as competitive from team to team and top to bottom as that 6 team league was. WWII and the 70s (expansion and the competing WHA) are when the league was at its weakest - not the Original 6 era. Anyways, yeah... it's hard to make comparisons, but it is possible to do so rationally, and I think it is fun. If the Norris was around back in Shore's time, he would have had 8 Norris trophies (in addition to his 3 Hart trophies). Source: Total Hockey (which compiles All Star Team Selection voting from the time to award retroactive awards). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
