The Best Defenseman to Never Win the Norris

[ScottM]

This is pretty simple. Who is the best defenseman that never won a Norris Trophy?

 

A couple of guidelines: 1) This is for players active and playing at a high level after the introduction of the trophy. Therefore, Eddie Shore (who retired before the Norris was created) or Bill Quackenbush (whose career was nearly over) aren't the what I'm looking for here. 2) Before anyone asks, yes, I did intentionally leave Shea Weber out of the poll. I think it's too early to include him, because he very well may still win a Norris.

 

Vote! Discuss!

[JackStraw]

@ScottM - I assume you meant Mark Howe and not Marty?

[ScottM]

@JackStraw You are correct. Fixed.

[JagerMeister]

Simple answer to a simple question, Brad Park and no one even comes close.

Without having to compete with the best defenseman in the world, Park would be held in much higher regard and would have most likely won the norris trophy atleast once ,or maybe even multiple times if his competition was anyone but Orr and a peak Potvin

[JR Ewing]

Technically: Eddie Shore. If the Norris were around in his day, he would have won it multiple times, what with having four Hart Trophies.

Realistically: Brad Park.

[Bertmega]

If Stevens gets to be on the list, than I vote for Derian Hatcher.

 

Also Eric Desjardins and Shea Weber I think have been or were cheated out of winning the Norris.

[yave1964]

Brad Park played in the shadow of Bobby Orr, the bar none absolute greatest defenseman in the history of the game. If he had played in any other era he would have won Multiple Norris Trophies.

[ScottM]

@JR Ewing You summed up my thoughts pretty well. I couldn't help but wonder how many Shore would have won when I mentioned him while typing up the guidelines. I don't think it's unrealistic to think that he might have had a string of them like Orr or Harvey did.

 

@Bertmega I know that there are many that feel that way about Weber, and I would have included him if he had reached a point in his career that a Norris win seemed completely unlikely. I think he still has some good years left and may still win one. He's only 29, after all.

 

@JagerMeister @yave1964 I agree that Park is the obvious answer, and I too think he would have won multiple awards if not for Orr. Great defenseman, great player overall.

[flyercanuck]

Park, Howe, Weber.

[Bertmega]

@ScottM

"I know that there are many that feel that way about Weber, and I would have included him if he had reached a point in his career that a Norris win seemed completely unlikely. I think he still has some good years left and may still win one. He's only 29, after all."

 

That is a very good point. He (Weber) probably has a lot of tread left on his tires too.

 

In all seriousness I think Eric Desjardins should have seen the Norris in 1999 (thanks Al MacInnis) or 2000 (Thanks Pronger). Man thinking back in the late  1990's St. Louis had a ferocious blue line. 

[ScottM]

I didn't really think the vote would be all that close, and I thought Park would run away with it. My reason for creating the post was just to get some discussion about these guys going. So, I'm very surprised to see that Mark Howe is nearly tied with Park right now. Howe was an outstanding defenseman, but what puts him ahead of Park in the minds of some? I'm not bashing anyone's opinion or vote. I'm asking just because I'm so surprised.

[jammer2]

So, I'm very surprised to see that Mark Howe is nearly tied with Park right now. Howe was an outstanding defenseman, but what puts him ahead of Park in the minds of some? I'm not bashing anyone's opinion or vote. I'm asking just because I'm so surprised.

 

 I have not voted, but it will be Howe. Why you ask?  Two things stick out....Mark Howe just might have been the most beautiful skater to ever lace up skates. His skating was jaw dropping, so elegant...but  yet so powerful. Tie that all important skill to a supreme hockey sense and you have an unmistakeable star on your hands. The fact that Howe never won the Norris, that is blasphemy in my books. He would lift you out of your seat, make the smart little touch pass that *nobody* else would have seen or even known it was available. The skating was God given...but I believe the hockey sense was passed down genetically....from if not the very best, than someone in the conversation...his Dad Gordie.

 

 I liked Brad Park when i was a kid....I really did. BUT....he did not lift you out of your seat like Howe did, he was an ok skater, no where near as fast, dynamic or smart as Mark Howe. No one will convince me of anything different.

 

 Brad McCrimmon was a great player in his own right, but he was made so much better being teamed up with Howe. Mark was the perfect partner for Brad. One stayed at home (for the most part...in general) and one roamed wherever the hell he wanted to...cause he was so fast, there was no such thing as being out of position....can you say that about Brad Park....um....no.

[flyercanuck]

 I have not voted, but it will be Howe. Why you ask?  Two things stick out....Mark Howe just might have been the most beautiful skater to ever lace up skates. His skating was jaw dropping, so elegant...but  yet so powerful. Tie that all important skill to a supreme hockey sense and you have an unmistakeable star on your hands. The fact that Howe never won the Norris, that is blasphemy in my books. He would lift you out of your seat, make the smart little touch pass that *nobody* else would have seen or even known it was available. The skating was God given...but I believe the hockey sense was passed down genetically....from if not the very best, than someone in the conversation...his Dad Gordie.

 

 I liked Brad Park when i was a kid....I really did. BUT....he did not lift you out of your seat like Howe did, he was an ok skater, no where near as fast, dynamic or smart as Mark Howe. No one will convince me of anything different.

 

 Brad McCrimmon was a great player in his own right, but he was made so much better being teamed up with Howe. Mark was the perfect partner for Brad. One stayed at home (for the most part...in general) and one roamed wherever the hell he wanted to...cause he was so fast, there was no such thing as being out of position....can you say that about Brad Park....um....no.

 

 

Excellent post sir!

[JagerMeister]

 I have not voted, but it will be Howe. Why you ask?  Two things stick out....Mark Howe just might have been the most beautiful skater to ever lace up skates. His skating was jaw dropping, so elegant...but  yet so powerful. Tie that all important skill to a supreme hockey sense and you have an unmistakeable star on your hands. The fact that Howe never won the Norris, that is blasphemy in my books. He would lift you out of your seat, make the smart little touch pass that *nobody* else would have seen or even known it was available. The skating was God given...but I believe the hockey sense was passed down genetically....from if not the very best, than someone in the conversation...his Dad Gordie.

 

 I liked Brad Park when i was a kid....I really did. BUT....he did not lift you out of your seat like Howe did, he was an ok skater, no where near as fast, dynamic or smart as Mark Howe. No one will convince me of anything different.

 

 Brad McCrimmon was a great player in his own right, but he was made so much better being teamed up with Howe. Mark was the perfect partner for Brad. One stayed at home (for the most part...in general) and one roamed wherever the hell he wanted to...cause he was so fast, there was no such thing as being out of position....can you say that about Brad Park....um....no.

Thats like saying Gilbert Perrault is a better player than Phil Esposito because he was a more a more beautiful skater and more exciting player.

Come on Jammer...this post seems like something HJ would write except it would be about Perrault...

and the bolded sentence.......

[jammer2]

@JagerMeister  I listed the reasons why I thought Howe was better than Park....all you did was rebut my comments with comments on my comments. I'd be more interested to hear what about Brad Park is better than Howe...what makes him superior?

[JagerMeister]

@JagerMeister  I listed the reasons why I thought Howe was better than Park....all you did was rebut my comments with comments on my comments. I'd be more interested to hear what about Brad Park is better than Howe...what makes him superior?

And i showed in my comment why your aesthetic reasons were not dat great....look, I am completely envious of all the people who got to watch hockey pre 90s, but it seems to me like the ONLY reason you favour Howe is due to aesthetics....what r u? a russian hockey fan?    

 

In all seriousness though, he came second to DENIS POTVIN AND BOBBY ORR 7 times...which is far more impressive than coming in second to Paul Coffey, an offensive defenseman who wasnt even among the best defensively.

[ScottM]

@JagerMeister  I listed the reasons why I thought Howe was better than Park....all you did was rebut my comments with comments on my comments. I'd be more interested to hear what about Brad Park is better than Howe...what makes him superior?

 

I may not agree with you, but I certainly respect your opinion. I thought you did a pretty good job of listing your reasons.

 

I don't think Park was quite as "stay at home" as Doug Harvey, but I look at him as being somewhat in the Harvey mold on defense. I can't think of many defensemen that I'd rather have on the ice to shut down the opponent's top line. From all I've read about him (and that's what I have to do, since he played before my time) he always did an exceptional job of positioning himself against opposing forwards, and he was an exceptional stick handler. Even after he stopped rushing the puck as much as he did in his early years, he was still more than capable of helping to set up a breakout with his passing ability.

 

Anyway, you guys are making me very glad I started this thread. There's some great discussion in here.

[JagerMeister]

I may not agree with you, but I certainly respect your opinion. I thought you did a pretty good job of listing your reasons.

 

I don't think Park was quite as "stay at home" as Doug Harvey, but I look at him as being somewhat in the Harvey mold on defense. I can't think of many defensemen that I'd rather have on the ice to shut down the opponent's top line. From all I've read about him (and that's what I have to do, since he played before my time) he always did an exceptional job of positioning himself against opposing forwards, and he was an exceptional stick handler. Even after he stopped rushing the puck as much as he did in his early years, he was still more than capable of helping to set up a breakout with his passing ability.

 

Anyway, you guys are making me very glad I started this thread. There's some great discussion in here.

And i dont

[jammer2]

And i dont

 

 

 Hey, nobody is forcing you to read my stuff, or respond to anything....simple, put me on ignore and all is solved. Don't know what your problem is, but life is to short to worry about the few who don't like you....pffft, like water off my back.

[jammer2]

@JagerMeister  After all of this....you *STILL* can't come with your own reasons why Park was better than Howe...and then go on to hint that you were to young to see them play.....so, why even comment on this thead.....or at least preface it with "don't remember myself but from what I have read"....

 

 You can't come up with any reasons why Park is better than Howe because A)you have no memory of the events to fall back on AND B) he was not better, and you can't find any info to back that up....

 

 

 Carry on....

 

 Brad Park was very good at a lot of things....elite at none of them. Howe had a better shot, better skater, better hockey sense, better in his own zone....I can go on and on...

[JagerMeister]

 Hey, nobody is forcing you to read my stuff, or respond to anything....simple, put me on ignore and all is solved. Don't know what your problem is, but life is to short to worry about the few who don't like you....pffft, like water off my back.

my question mark isnt working

seÉÉÉÉÉ

i was reffering to Scott mentioning that he respects your opinion, except he didnt add ``unlike someone on this thread``

[jammer2]

@JagerMeister  Well, Scott didn't say that because he didn't believe it to be true, I'd guess anyways....

 

 You have to admit, your statement looked pretty straight forward to me when I read it...if your question mark did not work, you could have typed it in....it puts the quote in a whole new light....

[ScottM]

@JagerMeister  After all of this....you *STILL* can't come with your own reasons why Park was better than Howe...and then go on to hint that you were to young to see them play.....so, why even comment on this thead.....or at least preface it with "don't remember myself but from what I have read"....

 

 You can't come up with any reasons why Park is better than Howe because A)you have no memory of the events to fall back on AND B) he was not better, and you can't find any info to back that up....

 

 

 Carry on....

 

 Brad Park was very good at a lot of things....elite at none of them. Howe had a better shot, better skater, better hockey sense, better in his own zone....I can go on and on...

 

Actually, I'm the one that said I was too young to have seen them play. That's one bad thing about still being fairly young. Lol. I will say in my defense on that point that I always try to do my best to research and form a well-informed opinion.

[jammer2]

.look, I am completely envious of all the people who got to watch hockey pre 90s,

 

 Scott, I was relying more on the above quote from Jagr....and hey, if you don't remember seeing it, that is all cool, like you said you read and gather info....I just don't like it when people didn't see stuff and fail to acknowledge it.....and I'm not saying anyone in this thread did that....

[JagerMeister]

@JagerMeister  After all of this....you *STILL* can't come with your own reasons why Park was better than Howe...and then go on to hint that you were to young to see them play.....so, why even comment on this thead.....or at least preface it with "don't remember myself but from what I have read"....

 

 You can't come up with any reasons why Park is better than Howe because A)you have no memory of the events to fall back on AND B) he was not better, and you can't find any info to back that up....

 

 

 Carry on....

 

 Brad Park was very good at a lot of things....elite at none of them. Howe had a better shot, better skater, better hockey sense, better in his own zone....I can go on and on...

being a runner up 7 times against Potvin and Orr is not better than being a runner up 3 times to an offensive defenseman who isnt that great defensively.....ok, whatever floats your boat

oh, and this

Brad Park Hart Nominations

5th 5 times

 

Mark Howe Hart nominations

3rd once

5th once

 

And then you remember again that Park was going against Salming, Orr and a peak potvin 

Howe maybe might have even had the better peak, since he was only third in hart votes to Lemieux and Gretzky (quite unlucky..lol) but he didnt sustain that greatness for long.

Like my god, if he was better, how come Park has more Norris runner ups against the best defenseman in the world and a peak potvin

 

 

 

@JagerMeister  Well, Scott didn't say that because he didn't believe it to be true, I'd guess anyways....

 

 You have to admit, your statement looked pretty straight forward to me when I read it...if your question mark did not work, you could have typed it in....it puts the quote in a whole new light....

ik