In an article, ESPN's Scott Burnside suggests that Nicklas Lidstrom will probably be nominated for the Norris Trophy, but, because of his knee injury he may not win what would be his sixth in the category. As he points out, history shows that miss large parts of the season due to injury are less likely to win trophies, and while this may be true, not giving the Norris to Lidstrom would be outright rediculous. Why should he be punished for needing less time to be better than everyone else? To me, that makes absolutely no sense at all.
To be honest, the reason for Lidstrom not to win isn't even all that valid in this case. Lidstrom has played 62 games, which is just seven less than the league-leading 69 (five Dallas players) and six behind the best defenseman in that category. Despite this, he still leads all defensemen in points. Thats right, he leads. As if that isn't enough, he also leads the entire leauge in plus/minus with +39 and he is 4th in ice time among all skaters. Burnside mentions Pittsburgh's Sergei Gonchar and Habs blueliner Andrei Markov as possible candidates, but while Gonchar is still very inconsistent in my opinion and Markov is a minus player, I find that unlikely. Still, I wouldn't be very surprised if any of the two do appear on the ballot.
Not only do I still consider Lidstrom the strongest, if not the only, candidate for the Norris, I also think he should be seriously considered for the Hart Trophy as well. A few weeks ago coach Mike Babcock made a strong case for his captain as the league MVP simply because he was the best player on the best team in the league. It is true they were the best team, and when he was injured they fell apart. That says it all.
Even if he doesn't get any consideration for the Hart, which he most likely won't, if he doesn't get his sixth Norris Trophy, years from now people will look back and laugh at the NHL's foolishness.
* * *
Don't forget to check out more cool clips at ultimatehockeytv
1 comment:
Good article. To me, Mr. Lidstrom is a complete enigma. The guy gets showered with perks by every hockey writer and critic and Norris Trophies seem to be fedexed to his home on a yearly basis. I've never really understood the Lidstrom hype but that does not mean I'm right.
As far my own humble opinion is concerned, I've never been sold on No. 5. I'm not saying he's not Norris Trophy material but five, six, or even seven of them? More than Ray Bourque my favorite player? Due to that, coupled with the fact that every time I've seen Lidstrom play for Tre Kronor he appears utterly lost, I find him to be highly overrated.
But like I said, perhaps I'm wrong. I thought about this not too long ago and came up with a theory. Bourque "only" collected five Norris Trophies. But back in his heydays, there were 4 or 5 other "Ray Bourques" such as Brian Leetch, Scott Stevens, Al MacInnis, Chris Chelios, and Paul Coffey. They were all Bourque-caliber players, in their prime at the same time, competing against each other thus the Norris was passed around among them every season. To be fair, Maybe Lidstrom also belongs to that high echelon of d-men but he doesn't have to share the Norris with anyone simply because there are no other defenders of that magnitude in today's game. Lidstrom is the only one. Food for thought.
BFox
Post a Comment