What, no Mike Green?

/obvious

Posted by Primis on 04/27/10 at 01:53 PM ET

Anton Volchenkov?

Posted by edillac from isolation on 04/27/10 at 01:56 PM ET

So the NHL players say Lidstrom is the best shut down D-man, but the writers do not even vote him in the top 3 for the Norris Trophy?
A little BIAS, perhaps?

Posted by w2j2 on 04/27/10 at 02:04 PM ET

They really are biased those stupid writers that voted him the Norris trophy six times. They really must hate him since he’s a Swede. Or maybe they just assumed everyone else had him on the ballot and picked someone else in the three slot. Persecution complexes work best for Bruce Boudreau and Ted Leonsis, not teams that have been at the top of the class for the last decade.

Posted by hockey1919 from mid-atlantic on 04/27/10 at 02:10 PM ET

Volchenkov is the only one who I would have considered to be in the running besides these guys…

Posted by Tony from Virginia Beach, VA on 04/27/10 at 02:14 PM ET

It’s not a persecution complex. It’s an observation on the cluelessness of so many professional hockey writers that instead of thinking who might be the best overall defenseman, regardless of name or reputation, some of them clearly took the easy lazy way out and just voted for the three guys with the most points.

Lidstrom no doubt had an off year for his standards, but still belongs in the overall top three more than Mike Green does.

Green is very talented offensively, no doubt - but the Norris isn’t for the best pure offensive defenseman.

Posted by Baroque from Michigan on 04/27/10 at 02:23 PM ET

I still say if Lidstrom has won six times they can’t all be that clueless or biased against him becasue that would negate the fact that he deserved his. He may be judged by a higher standard than most because of his excellence for so many years, but that is a positive bias working against him.  If anythyng the Norris has a reputation of “give it to the guy that won it last year” if in doubt. It seemed like it used to take at least three wins before even considering someone else.

I agree that Green isn’t a stellar defensemen, but neither was Paul Coffey and Rod Langway was one dimensional on the defensive end and yet both won the Norris. I’d be shocked if Green won it this year either way. Before the NHL decided they needed another trophy for forwards with the Selke they sould have created a best defensive defenseman award or best offensive defensmen to distinguish itfrom the Norris.

Posted by hockey1919 from mid-atlantic on 04/27/10 at 02:50 PM ET

Posted by pgoody on 04/27/10 at 02:51 PM ET

I agree that Green isn’t a stellar defensemen, but neither was Paul Coffey and Rod Langway was one dimensional on the defensive end and yet both won the Norris.

Posted by hockey1919 from mid-atlantic on 04/27/10 at 02:50 PM ET

They also played in an era when most defensemen were simply pylons, nobody blocked shots, etc…

Paul Coffey would be eaten alive in today’s NHL.  You saw it towards the end of his career, where his particular skillset really lost its effectiveness because the game had changed.  If Paul Coffey could be effective in today;‘s game, Andy Delmore would be a 5-time NHL All-Star by now.

Instead, defensemen started being expected to play, well… defense.

Posted by Primis on 04/27/10 at 03:11 PM ET

The thing is Nick gave us such exceptional seasons that when he plays worse, the stupid writers (except for Mirtle), suddently think he is bad. Which he has not been.

Posted by Andy from FightNight on 04/27/10 at 05:16 PM ET

That’s pretty remarkable.
With the exception of Jim Brown and Barry Sanders, what professional athletes were regarded by their peers as the very best at their position at the time of their retirement (which Lidstrom is reportedly contemplating)? And Brown and Sanders were considered the best largely because they retired prematurely, and relatively young, not at 39 years old.
That Lidstrom isn’t on the list of Norris candidates is a sad commentary on the insight of the writers and the way they’re distracted by showy numbers like Green displays.

Posted by BobS on 04/27/10 at 06:45 PM ET

No comment on this article.  I’ve already caused Kukla enough grief over my thoughts on the Norris ballot.

Nice to see the players respect Lidstrom as much as I do.

Posted by VooX from Behind the Bar in the Hasek Club Car on 04/27/10 at 06:48 PM ET

I’d say before Coffey and Langway ihere was Potivn and Robinson that could play in any era and weren’t pylons or one dimensional. I am not endorsing Coffey as the poster child for the Norris either, just making the point that it isn’t a bias against Lidstrom, the writers have long been wowed by offensive stats. I can defend the nominees only because I’m convinced Green won’t win.

Posted by hockey1919 from mid-atlantic on 04/27/10 at 08:10 PM ET

People, the article never mentioned how many NHL players were asked, and how they were selected to give answers.

Posted by Kel on 04/28/10 at 03:29 AM ET