17 pts, +12 in 10 games. Pretty impressive after all the time he's missed. What he showed before getting hurt last year and in the small sample size this year, no one is even close offensively. He's good defensively as well, just not the best. Why do so many people try to argue defensive ability is so much more important than offensive when you are talking about best all-around forward? I can understand when you are talking about a one-dimensional player, but he's not.
Another point of reference....the players voted him the best a few weeks ago even though he had only played 8 games a few months before the poll.
They will never vote Lidstrom an 8th trophy just because that would mean that people would have to admit that Lidstrom is just as good as or even better than Orr ever was. So by that fact alone, Lids will retire with 7 Norris Trophies.
On that note, if I am making a team and picking players from their prime, Lidstrom gets picked before Orr...
I think that is absolutely asinine. If you want to argue that people won't give him Norris because they don't want to admit Lidstrom is just as good or better, those same people could just fall back on this:
Orr, ignoring his rookie year, effectively played 8 seasons in the NHL, in those 8 seasons he has won:
- 8 Norris trophies - 3 Hart trophies - 2 Conn Smythe trophies - 2 Art Ross trophies
Some would argue that if his career was not cut short, he could have won 15-20 Norris trophies.
His offensive stats have been great, his defensive stats have been meh.
The problem is that there really are no defensive stats. Any stats you find that you can try and present as defensive stats are subjective at best.
That's the problem I always have with trying to determine who the best is defensively. You can do that with the Wings because you watch them play all the time. You can't really assess a player's defensive play without watching them all the time. Unless you watch every player just as much as every other player, you will never be able to form an objective view.
Posted by toby91_ca
on 15 February 2012 - 10:05 AM
Yeah, i'm not sure why they were all types of up in arms about it. It's that and the fact that 4 of them have been OT/SO winners. The Wings can never just get a pat on the back, haters gonna hate. I was hoping someone had alittle more of a background story about it though.
The OT/SO (especially SO) is a legitimate point though....it's impact is quite huge. That doesn't keep anyone from patting them on the back though...it's jut pointing out a fact.
Posted by toby91_ca
on 14 February 2012 - 10:05 AM
OK. Rewatched. The difference might be that Kronwall turned to his back and didn't target the head.
Rinaldo didn't target the head either though. I agreed with everything Shanny said, it was clearly a charge, which is why it should have been a penalty. I don't see why there is a suspension though. I guess what Rinaldo did last week weighed heavily into this as I don't see how what he did is worse than what Kronwall has done...see earlier video in this thread.
Leaving your feet to make a hit does not = suspension automatically. In a lot of cases, such a hit may target the head and will be suspensions, but when they don't, I think it's just a charging penalty.
He didn't target the head and the NHL agrees he didn't, otherwise, he would have gotten more than 2 games. If they wanted to suspend him, they should have done so last week.
dont know if that deserved a suspension... Ericsson shouldn't have been looking behind him. These concussion rules are so dumb (not that this was a hit to the head).
You are correct, Big E shouldn't have been doing what he did, but that doesn't mean he should get hit the way he did. I agree with no suspension though.
Posted by toby91_ca
on 13 February 2012 - 03:23 PM
I thought i made it clear on my post, that Yzerman was my pick. I was merely throwing in great names that helped make the Yzerman era that much greater. That guys like Draper and McCarty were built around Yzerman.
Sorry I lost you.
I think you are losing me to. If you are having a discussion about all time greats, I don't think McCarty or Draper should even me allowed to know about the discussion, let alone be involved in it
Posted by toby91_ca
on 13 February 2012 - 01:30 PM
I have Howe 2nd all-time, behind only Wayne Gretzky. He has led the league in points by Lemieux-like margins, but was mean and good defensively as well. He finished top 5 in points for 20 straight years - next closest is Gretzky at 16. He also led the league in postseason points 5 times.
Off topic now, but interesting that you make reference to Lemieux in terms of how wide of a margin Howe led in points rather than Gretzky. I did a quick comparsion and learned a few things (actually, learned one thing and was reminded of a few others). I didn't realize just how much of a wide marging Howe was winning scoring titles. I guess I just assumed it was small since he didn't put up huge point totals. So here is my comparison in terms of how much each led the rest of the league in the years they won the scoring title.
I've put % in brackets beause scoring was lower in Howe's ara so his margin would look a lot smaller otherwise.
A lot of people discount Gretzky's stats because he played in an era where every scored a ton. This is true, but the extent to which he dominated is quite amazing. The bolded stats are just plain stupid.
Another interesting note, if Lemieux didn't miss the entire 94/95 season, he or Gretzky would likely have won teh scoring title for 17 years in a row.
Posted by toby91_ca
on 09 February 2012 - 05:33 PM
I'm guessing it's partly that, but I think it's also that Lidstrom constantly has his head up, so he's really hard to get a good hit on.
It's seriously ridiculous how little he looks down at the puck. Next game just watch Lids. He's almost never looking down, whether he's skating up ice with the puck, making a pass, or taking a shot. I'm not sure he even knows what his skates look like.
No, that may be true in other examples, but I am specifically referring to situations where he could have easily been hammered, the player is there, they still hit him, but it was more like the type of bump you'd see at an all star game.
FadooBobcat Bob McCown Sydney Crosby has injury to C1 and C2 vertebrae
FadooBobcat Bob McCown Injury diagnosed during recent trip to Utah, but apparently missed by Pittsburgh doctors who were treating him.
FadooBobcat Bob McCown Drs expect Crosby to heal and be ready for playoffs. Unclear if he even suffered 2nd concussion. Sid said to be very unhappy with Pit docs.
I see this as great news for the league, but awful news for the Pens doctors.
Edit: I'm assuming the vertebrae injury happened with the original concussion and had it been found/addressed, he wouldn't have had any issues after he came back in December.
The Pens medical staff has to be completely embarrased right about now, but they seem to have screwed up several times. Let's not forget that they let him play, not only the 3rd period in the Winter classic, but the next game as well...after likely having broken his neck and suffering a oncussion. I understand the neck thing just came out now, but even without that, they should have learned from Crosby's concussion, yet this year, they let Letang go back in a game after taking a pretty wicked head shot. Sure enough, within the next few days, he's out with a concussion.
Is anyone else bothered by the way Kane sounds when he's talked to by the commentators? He sounds to me like he doesn't want to be bothered, or kind of arrogant. I hear he's a bit of a jerk from even Chicago fans but I was just wondering if anyone else got that feeling...
With that said, Kanes superman goal was pretty neat. I thought Perry's was a bit better.
I'm not bothered, he's just a complete idiot/ass/whatever you want to call him. If he was related to me, I'd be bothered.
I think it's asking for a complete disaster. What happens if the game needs to be pushed back a few hours because of weather like it has in past years. All of a sudden you are competing directly with the Super Bowl. The aricle elludes to the need to push back the timing in the past and one of the suggestions was just to play new year's night.....why did they simply forget all about that when they got to the "obvious" choice?
Someone who is hit from behind into the boards does not have their feet flopping up behind them like that....no question he dove and not hidden very well. I'm guessing the ref didn't actually see the full play and used judgment to come up with the 2 min boarding call.