If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
If you are having difficulty logging in, please REFRESH the page and clear your browser cache and try again.
If you still can't get logged in, please try using Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome, Firefox, Opera, or Safari to login. Also be sure you are using the latest version of your browser. Internet Explorer has not been updated in over seven years and will no longer work with the Forum software. Thanks
The Wings would've won all 3 cups from 97-2002 without Lidstrom. BTW, Holmstrom, Draper and Maltby also won cups without Yzeman too. That's a really stupid point to make.
Didn't say it meant a whole lot. Just that Yzerman had Nick-less team , didn't win the big one. Lids only had a couple seasons without Yzerman and managed to and almost pulled off a second. That is all.
But your right we should ignore his 1k+ points. 450 +-. And considering a career of 21 seasons only 500 penalty minutes by a defenseman. Because he is just over rated.
Didn't say it meant a whole lot. Just that Yzerman had Nick-less team , didn't win the big one. Lids only had a couple seasons without Yzerman and managed to and almost pulled off a second. That is all.
But your right we should ignore his 1k+ points. 450 +-. And considering a career of 21 seasons only 500 penalty minutes by a defenseman. Because he is just over rated.
You can say the same thing about Draper, Maltby and Holmstrom. Guess they were better too.
Why is it ok for you guys to completely trash Yzerman, yet you get completely bent out of shape over Lidstrom who was not even in Yzerman's class?
Nowhere have I trashed Yzerman. I'm a big Yzerman mark. Lidstrom is completely in his class, he has the hardware to show for it. You don't get 7 Conn Smythes for nothing. If you don't see it then I can only assume your like Billy Hoyle, who can listen to Jimi Hendrix but can't hear him.
Oh please. Fedorov did more to shut down Forsberg than Lidstrom. If Lidstrom was so great, then why did our forwards have to become defensive forwards? Why did Yzerman and the rest of our forwards have to completely change their game?
Because the Bryan Murray teams were terrible in their defensive responsibilities. Because when they faced a stellar defensive team in the Devils the Devils made mincemeat of them. Because the high flying 80's NHL games where minimal emphasis placed on defense became a thing of the past.
Do you need anymore? Or was this a trick question? Its a fairly simple concept, once the Devils broke through and the advent of the neutral zone trap you had to focus on defense.
I divorce my comments from CB's. Wow, you can call Lidstrom quiet or point out he wasn't flashy but to say he was over rated would effectively negate any further comment from that person on the subject. Still, it's all just opinions, not facts in this part of the conversation.
Why is it ok for you guys to completely trash Yzerman, yet you get completely bent out of shape over Lidstrom who was not even in Yzerman's class?
Who said anything bad about Yzerman. I'd have as much of an issue with that as I would be with a Lidstrom is overrated comment.
You started a debate about calling Lids and Zets "The Captain". All anyone is trying to say is that Lids is closer to Yzerman than he is Henrik. But you know if I called Z overrated and laughed off the forum. Rightfully so. But now you are going to get your "panties in a bunch" (not attacking you as a female, I would and have said this to many male posters, I imagine panties riding up into a person being much more painful and annoying then boxers and much easier to happen then briefs) and whine to admins about mistreatment because you not only called one of the greatest defenseman and the greatest Redwing defenseman, not just overrated "the most overrated Detroit athlete ever". Not only did you say it but you continue to defend the undefendable.
It's like trying to say the Millen is just the most miss-understood and the NFL just wasn't ready for him as a GM.
If Yzerman was such a tremendous leader that trained the team so well, why did they fail to win it every year.
Nah the real story is as good as Yzerman's leadership was, it was the talent of the team that Bowman, Holland company assembled. He will openly admit his leadership was overrated to the point that it became mythology. Yzerman is embarassed about the legend of the Vancouver speech. I'm sure there were points where his leadership helped, but it was the same thing with Lidstrom it isn't hollywood speeches. Lidstrom was a great leader. He was their best player over his career, he deserved The Captain moniker. Everyone knew to the point where it was a seamless transition and nobdy questioned its use other than TonyG and yourself.
pANDs
Paul Coffey was never a leader on the team. He was a great skater and a tremendous skater, but they didn't take their defensive cues from Coffey. They did take their defensive cues from Lidstrom. In fact in their heyday, their stifling defense was directly the result of his talent and how he ran things on the blue line.
If Yzerman was such a tremendous leader that trained the team so well, why did they fail to win it every year.
You've trashed Lidstrom to the point that said a baboon could lead the 2008 team because Yzerman had them trained so well. If he had them trained so well, why didn't he lead them every year to a Cup. Because Knute Rocke speeches work well in Hollywood screenplays but they work better in movies. Talent, luck, staying healthy are all needed to win titles.
You do need leadership, but its hilarious that yuou play up Yzerman's leadership and disqualify Lidstrom's leadership, it as if the 2008 title was on autopilot. Please.
Nah the real story is as good as Yzerman's leadership was, it was the talent of the team that Bowman, Holland company assembled.
This is 100 pecent true. I acknowledge Yzerman was a good leader, but talent wins, period. Yzerman's leadership didn't make guys become talented. Again not trashing Yzerman at all.
He will openly admit his leadership was overrated to the point that it became mythology.
In numeorous interviews he has said this. Relaying what he said is far from trashing him.
Yzerman is embarassed about the legend of the Vancouver speech
This is fact, he's stated that he's embarassed by how this grew into a legend. Again, not trashing.
I'm sure there were points where his leadership helped, but it was the same thing with Lidstrom it isn't hollywood speeches.
Nowhere is that trashing Yzerman.
He was their best player over his career, he deserved The Captain moniker
This is true. He was there 20 years, over those 20 years he was their best player. The majority of Yzerman's best years happened prior to Lidstrom. And Lidstrom was there 6 more years after Yzerman. And really with Yzerman, his last 5 years while he was still a good 2 way player he wasn't consered a top 10 forward. Lidstrom was their best defenseman by far and Norris trophy contender every year until his retirement. You mentioned Fedorov, he was great. If he had been there for 20 years with Lidtrom, there might be a discussion, he was gone after 2003.
So lets sum it up. I'm right, that post did nothing to trash Yzerman. In fact you'll find no posts of me trashing Yzerman. As opposed to you, who evidently thrives on trashing Lidstrom.
Where? Have you read most professional athlete's in regard to "leadership"?
Have you read Urlachers old quote about motivation, to pharaphrase "these guys are professional athletes paid millions of dollars to play the sport they love, if they need me to say something to give them motivation, then there is already a problem".
Yet Urlacher was considered a huge leader in the locker room. Why by working through injury by always driving to best everyone else in the weight room.
Commenting that Yzerman was might not be some super motivator, by his own words and did it the same way as most leaders, by pushing to be the best and letting the coach use him as an example on how to approach the game.
I was watching a part on SB winning QB's that Brady and Montana were on. Brady commented that Bilichek would use a Brady a screwup from the previous practice to open the next days film review. That makes Brady a leader. Do you know why because everyone knows Brady's capabilities, his drive, and the work he puts into practice. If BB can yelled at for that, then what does that mean for everyone else. Brady is a leader by setting a example both for craftsmanship and second for allowing BB to set the bar above him and taking it like a man. It's why coaches in Basketball have such a hard time.
So it's not bashing Yzerman to say that his "leadership" was overrated in the sense of dramatic speaches or instilling drive in the young ones. He lead by being trying to be the best and by doing so always keeping the bar for those less self motivated always out of reach. For every Ray Lewis there are 100 fantastic leaders that don't have to say a word, and honestly its better that way because in the end I would rather the coach being the motivator and not a team easily following someone that could turn on a dime and decide they don't like the Team/coach/city one day.
1. Captainclueless says something stupid.
2. A forum member(s) calls her on it
3. She defends her ridiculous position ad-naseum.
4. Wash. Rinse. Repeat.
Tweet
Comment