One final thought about those that talk about goalie equipment from the 1960s compared to today. Yes it was inferior, but the sticks were just as abysmal.
I coached high school ice hockey. Used a regular stick in the 80s when I’d shoot on the goalies during practice.
Decided to one day use my Paul Coffey game used stick to practice.
The puck was exploding off my stick. Like shot out of a cannon.
So while goalie equipment has improvement, sticks have improved right along with it.
I was using a wooden Coffey stick, and they did something with those things to give Al MacInnis like power.
Blew my mind the velocity that wooden stick produced.
@Goldenage said:
Imagine the Red Wings coach saying to Lidstrom “even though I know you can get us 3 points per game because no one can stop you, don’t do that.” If Lidstrom, Potvin or Bourque could skate through defenses with ease, they would have.
Funny enough, you just made the perfect case for why Bill Russell and his 15 pts per game belongs nowhere near the GOAT discussion for basketball.
How so?
When it's pointed out that Russell averaged only 15 a game - in an extremely high-scoring era - his defenders will say that Red Auerbach told him to not worry about scoring, that it wasn't needed. As Goldenage's comment about Lidstrom points out, this is absurd.
Tabe- I appreciate you saying Mario could be the best forward ever. I don’t go there because I feel he and Wayne are very equal.
We're going to continue to disagree on Orr - so be it. We've made our points and still disagree.
With regard to Mario, I just look at it like this - he played through the lowest-scoring era in the NHL in 60+ years - and still is #2 in points per game.
Tabe- I appreciate you saying Mario could be the best forward ever. I don’t go there because I feel he and Wayne are very equal.
We're going to continue to disagree on Orr - so be it. We've made our points and still disagree.
With regard to Mario, I just look at it like this - he played through the lowest-scoring era in the NHL in 60+ years - and still is #2 in points per game.
Does defensive zone work matter ?
If it did you’d include it in your analysis. Watch the 87 Canada Cup and watch Wayne and Mario in their own end. Watch game film of how soft Mario was with Pittsburgh on defense.
Wayne is the #1 forward all time in plus minus. Mario doesn’t even crack the top 50. Even with all those points.
Both Wayne and Mario are no Bobby Clarke when it comes to defensive zone work, but Mario is way below both of them.
If you’re only going to look at points, then I agree. If you’re a half ice guy, that’s fine😉. I’m a full ice guy. Bobby 1st. Wayne 2nd. Gordie or Mario 3rd.
Tabe- I appreciate you saying Mario could be the best forward ever. I don’t go there because I feel he and Wayne are very equal.
We're going to continue to disagree on Orr - so be it. We've made our points and still disagree.
With regard to Mario, I just look at it like this - he played through the lowest-scoring era in the NHL in 60+ years - and still is #2 in points per game.
Does defensive zone work matter ?
For my first line center, no, I don't much care about the defensive zone.
Yes, I TRULY believe that Orr could be #5 (or better) in PPG, 0.2 PPG better than Josi, if he were playing today. If there is something besides your feels that tells you otherwise, by all means share it.
Sorry, I wasn't clear. 5th in points all-time - not 5th in the league this year - if playing today. You think he's going to average 114 points a year when no defenseman has reached even 95 points in 30 years? Heck, 86 points has only been reached twice in that time.
It's really simple as to why - teams play defense now. Goalies are far superior because of improved athleticism and lighter equipment. 4th-line guys - who didn't even exist in Orr's era - can pretty much all skate. No one plays 30 minutes a night. Everyone blocks shots. The year had his best season (1975), Boston gave up 245 goals. That would be considered an awful number now. This year, Detroit is giving up what is thought to be a ridiculous number of goals at 3.80 per game, with Montreal somehow even worse at 3.90. In 1975, with barely half as many teams in the league, Detroit would only be 7th-worst with that 3.80.
So, no, Orr wouldn't put up anywhere near the numbers he did if he played today. He'd still be great most likely but not 114 points a year.
What you and I have in common is that we each have no earthly idea how many points Bobby Orr would get per season if he played today. Your point, that total offense goes up and down in different eras, is obviously true and, equally obviously, irrelevant to the question of whether Bobby Orr is the GOAT. You diverted me into a discussion of where he might rank on an offensive leaderboard, and that got us nowhere. My contention is not, and has never been, that Bobby Orr was a greater scorer than Wayne Gretzky; my contention is that he was a better hockey player than Wayne Gretzky.
So, no, Orr wouldn't put up anywhere near the numbers he did if he played today. He'd still be the GOAT most likely, but not 114 points a year.
This is for you @thisistheshow - Jim Rice was actually a pretty good player.
@Goldenage said:
Topps- I do truly mean it. So I’ll say it again. Thank you so much for your time serving our country.
My dad from Worcester Mass served in Korea, and I lost a treasured hockey player I coached when he was 17. War and death is not easy.
I know the stories, and lived through losing a child I loved.
Over and out. Enjoy the forum.
Golden age
I'm so sorry. You have my deepest sympathies.
@Goldenage said:
Topps- I do truly mean it. So I’ll say it again. Thank you so much for your time serving our country.
My dad from Worcester Mass served in Korea, and I lost a treasured hockey player I coached when he was 17. War and death is not easy.
I know the stories, and lived through losing a child I loved.
Over and out. Enjoy the forum.
Golden age
I'm so sorry. You have my deepest sympathies.
Still don’t think you understand Scotty Bowman comparing McDavids speed to Orr’s.
Still don’t think you understand Ken Dryden, the #2 all time save percentage guy, who played with the smaller equipment, when he talks about how he was afraid when Orr came at him because of his speed.
If Orr had Coffeys career path he’d be at 1.5 to 2 ppg.
If Orr played with Hull, #8, or Sid, he’d be at 1.5 ppg.
If Orr played with the Rangers the past ten years he’d be at 1+ ppg, depending on how much freedom the coach gave him.
Answer this one question. When’s the last time you ever heard a hall of fame coach say that he saw a 13 year old kid outskating 17 year old junior hockey players in Canada ?
Read what Scotty Bowman says and afterwards please tell me that Orr doesn’t dominate in todays game.
Answer this one question. When’s the last time you ever heard a hall of fame coach say that he saw a 13 year old kid outskating 17 year old junior hockey players in Canada ?
Read what Scotty Bowman says and afterwards please tell me that Orr doesn’t dominate in todays game.
Yeah, it doesn't change my opinion. McDavid is clearly the fastest player in the league - although Dylan Larkin actually holds the speed record from the All-Star competition and you can you make a case that Andreas Athanasiou is pretty much as fast - but it's not like he's constantly dancing circles around guys.
Lemme put it in sprinting terms: Bobby Orr was a 9.8 100m dash guy whose competition was 10.7 or slower (often a LOT slower). McDavid is a 9.6 or 9.7 100m dash guy whose competition is 10.0 guys.
I've said Orr would still be an excellent player, All-Star level and all that. But he ain't leading the league in scoring. Or even close to it.
@Tabe said:
I've said Orr would still be an excellent player, All-Star level and all that. But he ain't leading the league in scoring. Or even close to it.
You seem to be stuck on the scoring half of the game. If you've addressed the other half, I missed it. And to be fair, since Orr was a defenseman, I think you're actually ignoring more than half of his skills, and why people, including myself, consider him the GOAT.
And you keep mentioning "scoring" but Orr never led the league in goal scoring, he led the league, repeatedly, in assists. Now there may be a reasonable argument that how fast you skate helps your assist total, but what that argument is escapes me at the moment. Orr did have mad "scoring" skills, especially for a defenseman, but his strongest offensive skill was his passing, and that skill was completely unrelated to his speed, and completely independent of his era.
This is for you @thisistheshow - Jim Rice was actually a pretty good player.
Answer this one question. When’s the last time you ever heard a hall of fame coach say that he saw a 13 year old kid outskating 17 year old junior hockey players in Canada ?
Read what Scotty Bowman says and afterwards please tell me that Orr doesn’t dominate in todays game.
Yeah, it doesn't change my opinion. McDavid is clearly the fastest player in the league - although Dylan Larkin actually holds the speed record from the All-Star competition and you can you make a case that Andreas Athanasiou is pretty much as fast - but it's not like he's constantly dancing circles around guys.
Lemme put it in sprinting terms: Bobby Orr was a 9.8 100m dash guy whose competition was 10.7 or slower (often a LOT slower). McDavid is a 9.6 or 9.7 100m dash guy whose competition is 10.0 guys.
I've said Orr would still be an excellent player, All-Star level and all that. But he ain't leading the league in scoring. Or even close to it.
Explain to us why a guy who is as fast or faster than McDavid, has the elusiveness of Gretzky, and passes as good or better than Adam Oates wouldn’t obtain a high point total if he, like Paul Coffey, played over half his career with Gretzky and Mario ?
Like I said, Orr was so good he’d average 1.5 to 2.0 points per game easily for his career under that scenario, and if healthy would be second to Gretzky in all time assists.
Love how you disregarded a 13 year old dominating 16 to 20 year olds in junior. From a hall of fame coach even.
I’m sure you know that all these wonderful skaters today would be slow and awkward in Orr’s day.
Dylan Larkin would be stumbling as much as Brad Park did. The blade was thin and there was no ankle support like today. Kids today are taught edge control, using the inside and outside of the blade to learn balancing techniques to improve skills. With the ankle support they have, they are able to accomplish these skills.
In 1970 the thin blade only allowed you to skate like a robot. If you tried to execute Gretzky’s sharp turns on your inside or outside edge you were doomed to fail. With no ankle support and a thin skating blade along with no helmet you can understand why players look so awful and slow back then.
Here’s a 100 percent fact for you. If Gretzky played during the 50s, he wouldn’t be as good as Howe or the Rocket. Mario would simply be a right handed Beliveau.
All your skaters today would be those 16-20 year old junior players that Orr would be skating circles around. Only McDavid would have a chance to play with him.
Do you understand the great physical advantage biologically an advanced freshman athlete in college has over a 5 foot 2 thirteen year old in eight grade ?
Do you understand how physically superior he is, and do you acknowledge that it would take an extremely gifted 13 year old to dominate him and his athletic friends in hockey, soccer, basketball, football, or swimming for that matter.
That’s why people were so overwhelmed by Orr, not only in junior, but also in the NHL. He simply needed a better league to play in.
........
I'm no expert. But it seems as though many would be. Even just considering auto pens, or managers who sign for clients, etc. That's on top of all the straight forgeries.
Ok I have watched HK for a very long time and tons of film from the 1950's. I love C McDavid. A true generational talent.
However, he was not just named HK most complete player. Crosby was (love him also!!!!). Or the man fellow NHLers would want on their team. Yes he was the man for just one important game. If the NHL had waited a few years, he would easily have made the 100 greatest. I totally agree the average player of today is so much better than years ago. Watch a game from 1954 and see Rocket skate with his straight broomstick and just "drag" the puck on the outside as he goes by a defender. Makes a move to the net and makes one fake and sends it in on the other side. Years later Bobby Orr would do the same thing except he took the puck from behind the net. Outraced 5 defenders and skated around the net and put in in giving the goalie no chance to change sides. Hockey would never be the same. Most NHLers knew a 14 YO ORR was good enough to play in the NHL. They were waiting for him and gave him an old fashioned welcome. in 1966 when H Howell was walking away with the Norris he was told by his contemporaries to 'enjoy it' as it will be his last. It was.
Wayne Gretzky said, "the skates B Orr had worn were pitiful." Now imagine we could switch the time and the skates. everything else equal. Orr makes the scoring champion look easy and the Norris and Hart. Maybe the S Cup and C Smythe. McDavid gets named to the NHL all star 2nd team.
Now imagine we can give Bobby modern day medical and let him play on 2 good knees and play 2X longer. OMG !!!!!!!!!
Not only do we not ever have this discussion he would be recognized as the greatest team sport player ever!!!!
For me the greatest HK player all time is an easy choice. Jaw dropping Mario is #2. #99 is 3rd.
If you have never listened to L McDonald describe the 2 minutes he spent chasing Orr on a penalty kill go find it. He said, both benched were "laughing their arses" off watching it. He further said, "if B Orr didn't want you to have the puck you weren't getting it." The respect of Orr's contemporaries is similar to Beliveau except it is 100% what Orr did on the ice.
Collecting PSA... FB,BK,HK,and BB HOF RC sets 1948-76 Topps FB Sets FB & BB HOF Player sets 1948-1993 NY Yankee Team Sets
@Tabe said:
I've said Orr would still be an excellent player, All-Star level and all that. But he ain't leading the league in scoring. Or even close to it.
You seem to be stuck on the scoring half of the game. If you've addressed the other half, I missed it. And to be fair, since Orr was a defenseman, I think you're actually ignoring more than half of his skills, and why people, including myself, consider him the GOAT.
And you keep mentioning "scoring" but Orr never led the league in goal scoring, he led the league, repeatedly, in assists. Now there may be a reasonable argument that how fast you skate helps your assist total, but what that argument is escapes me at the moment. Orr did have mad "scoring" skills, especially for a defenseman, but his strongest offensive skill was his passing, and that skill was completely unrelated to his speed, and completely independent of his era.
In hockey, when referring to leading the league in "scoring", that refers to total points, not goals, not assists.
Orr isn't in the conversation as a top defensive defenseman. He's just not. His reputation comes nearly entirely from his offensive game. When people say he changed the game, they sure aren't referring to his defense. That's why I've essentially ignored it.
I don't care what Orr did when he was 13. It's irrelevant.
I have repeatedly mentioned equipment differences. Having acknowledged that, it's very obvious that today's players are significantly bigger and are significantly better athletes than Orr's contemporaries. The game itself is significantly different.
I think the use of overrated is giving people fits. I think Orr would still excel in the modern game, I just don't he'd be considered the GOAT.
@Tabe said:
I don't care what Orr did when he was 13. It's irrelevant.
I have repeatedly mentioned equipment differences. Having acknowledged that, it's very obvious that today's players are significantly bigger and are significantly better athletes than Orr's contemporaries. The game itself is significantly different.
I think the use of overrated is giving people fits. I think Orr would still excel in the modern game, I just don't he'd be considered the GOAT.
Mike Gartner was just as fast as any of todays players outside of McDavid and Larkin. Bobby Orr was faster than all three of them.
Mike Bossy averaged more goals per game than Wayne Gretzky. He’s better than all your “gifted” players today too.
Ken Dryden is #2 all time in save percentage right with Hasek. Better than all your “better” athletes today.
Bobby Clarke would teach Jonathan Toews how to be the best offensive/defensive forward the game ever saw. Yzerman could attend class too. Toews and Steve Y played on great teams. Compare their plus minus to Clarkes. Ain’t even close.
Clark Gillies would first beat the crap out of #8, and then Butch Goring, and Bob Bourne would check the heck out of him, dominating him and his team.
Yeah, Gainey and Robinson would do the same.
Bigger ? Yeah, Patrick Kane and Johnny Gaudreau would strike fear in a second grader, and Dave Schultz and Bob Kelly would be no match for Brian Rafalski in the corner.
Derain Hatcher, the worst skater on team USA in that huge Cup win over Canada in 1996 was the best D man in the tournament, and Larry Robinson and his Canadiens and the 60s Canadiens would skate circles around him.
Jean Beliveau was small. Bobby Hull was not strong. Brett must have done roids to get so big, because dad as you think was pee wee Herman.
Brad Marchand is a giant. After Frank Mahovlich skated circles around him, Brad could stand up and be able to tie the Big Ms skates.
Why is Steve Yzerman only the #50 all time forward in plus minus ? He’s so powerful compared to little Gordie Howe.
Todays great skaters only care about conditioning. That’s why they’re so much better. Has nothing to do with equipment. They only train and eat healthy .
@Goldenage said:
Compare their plus minus to Clarkes. Ain’t even close.
The fact you mentioned plus/minus - twice - as if it's somehow an important stat or one that anybody with any hockey knowledge cares about is funny.
Bigger ? Yeah, Patrick Kane and Johnny Gaudreau would strike fear in a second grader, and Dave Schultz and Bob Kelly would be no match for Brian Rafalski in the corner.
Yes, bigger. You're delusional if you think NHL players are not bigger and better athletes than the players of yore. On average, of course.
Brad Marchand is a giant. After Frank Mahovlich skated circles around him, Brad could stand up and be able to tie the Big Ms skates.
Brad Marchand is a midget in today's game. He's the same size as Rocket Richard.
Why is Steve Yzerman only the #50 all time forward in plus minus ? He’s so powerful compared to little Gordie Howe.
In 1960, the Stanley Cup champion Montreal Canadiens had TWO players on their roster over 6'0" tall. And five guys exactly 6'0". They had ONE player over 200 lbs - and he was 205.
The defending Stanley Cup champion Tampa Bay Lightning have six players on their roster 6'0" or SMALLER. They have THIRTEEN guys 198 lbs or heavier, including SIX guys that are 225 or bigger.
But, sure, the old-time guys were just as big and strong.
@Tabe said:
When people say he changed the game, they sure aren't referring to his defense. That's why I've essentially ignored it.
Just so I'm clear on what you're saying, you are talking about a defenseman and ignoring his defense? That's why we're talking past each other: I'm talking about hockey, you're talking about scoring. And no, Orr wasn't the greatest defensive player of all time, but he was a great defensive player, and a game changing offensive player. The combination of the two - what we hockey fans like to call a hockey player - was, IMO, the GOAT.
There was a thread a while back about who would win, a team of five Gretzkys or a team of five Orrs (given equal goaltending behind them). My opinion, shared by most in that thread, was that the Orr team would win easily. I think a team of five Orrs would beat a team of five anyones, and I struggle to think of anyone who could even compete with the Orr team. The man was fantastic at every aspect of the game. If he played today, he would be fantastic at every aspect of the game. Whether or not he was, or would be today, #1 at ANY aspect of the game is irrelevant; it's the total package that matters.
This is for you @thisistheshow - Jim Rice was actually a pretty good player.
Wait. Did someone say Orr wasn’t the greatest defensive player of all time ? Lol.
Does that person know that puck possession is a teams greatest defensive asset ?
Corner wars won. Face offs won.
Puck possession is the best defensive strategy. Better than blocked shots.
Orr was the best defensive player ever by far.
Scotty Bowman instructed his teams to never skate the puck down his side, because he’d just take it away from you and head back up ice. Read that article to hear from the great Bowman, who used plus minus.
@Goldenage said:
Wait. Did someone say Orr wasn’t the greatest defensive player of all time ? Lol.
Does that person know that puck possession is a teams greatest defensive asset ?
Corner wars won. Face offs won.
Puck possession is the best defensive strategy. Better than blocked shots.
Orr was the best defensive player ever by far.
Scotty Bowman instructed his teams to never skate the puck down his side, because he’d just take it away from you and head back up ice. Read that article to hear from the great Bowman, who used plus minus.
Fair points. If you include everything you've included under the heading of "defense" (I wouldn't, but it's not wrong to do so) then I agree that Orr was the greatest defensive player in history.
This is for you @thisistheshow - Jim Rice was actually a pretty good player.
@Goldenage said:
Yes, the same Lightning team that got swept in the first by an overall smaller Columbus team two years ago. Overall size didn’t seem to matter then.
You have a weird definition of "much smaller". That Columbus team had 19 different guys suit up who were 6'2" or taller, 5 guys 215 or heavier. They were a touch smaller than Tampa, not "much smaller".
But size is so important, right ?
You're right - size doesn't matter at all. That must be why every GM in the NHL actively seeks guys who are 5'7" and the average NHL player has gotten smaller over the years. Except, they don't and they haven't.
@Tabe said:
When people say he changed the game, they sure aren't referring to his defense. That's why I've essentially ignored it.
Just so I'm clear on what you're saying, you are talking about a defenseman and ignoring his defense? That's why we're talking past each other: I'm talking about hockey, you're talking about scoring. And no, Orr wasn't the greatest defensive player of all time, but he was a great defensive player, and a game changing offensive player. The combination of the two - what we hockey fans like to call a hockey player - was, IMO, the GOAT.
When talking about Orr, you definitely have to look at the full package. All I said was he's not in the conversation for greatest defensive defenseman ever - something you agreed with. But his teams never finished higher than 3rd in GAA. They were 8th once, 6th a couple times and dead last his rookie year. You'd think they'd have been higher at least once or twice.
There was a thread a while back about who would win, a team of five Gretzkys or a team of five Orrs (given equal goaltending behind them).
Oh, that's an easy win for the Orr team for sure. Orr was a more complete player, no question.
@Goldenage said:
Read that article to hear from the great Bowman, who used plus minus.
Scotty basically invented the stat though he tracked it slightly differently. It's also been clearly shown to be basically meaningless. Wayne Gretzky has the 3rd highest +/- season ever and he needed a map to find his own defensive zone. Doug Smith, a completely forgotten by the mists of time, is 4th with a season of +98. Moritz Seider has a -10 this year for a bad Detroit team. Looks terrible, until you realize he's actually +10 when Detroit has a goalie in their net. And so on.
@Goldenage said:
Read that article to hear from the great Bowman, who used plus minus.
Scotty basically invented the stat though he tracked it slightly differently. It's also been clearly shown to be basically meaningless. Wayne Gretzky has the 3rd highest +/- season ever and he needed a map to find his own defensive zone. Doug Smith, a completely forgotten by the mists of time, is 4th with a season of +98. Moritz Seider has a -10 this year for a bad Detroit team. Looks terrible, until you realize he's actually +10 when Detroit has a goalie in their net. And so on.
Is it fair to say that if we compared Mario Lemieux and Wayne Gretzky’s best four seasons where their teams let up a similar amount of goals, and we found that one player had a much better plus minus, would you admit that one player was better than the other defensively ?
Please consider that Wayne Gretzky’s greatest strength in having such a great plus minus even though he rarely played “strong” defense was his puck possession skills. His elusiveness in tight spaces was incredible. I saw Mario play a lot in person. Mario was a huge smoker until he got cancer. It’s part of the French culture in Canada as we’ve seen recently with Bossy and LaFluer. Mario was out of gas a lot during shifts. The guy was big and strong, but if you closed him down he’d dump the puck off. Wayne would side step you. Wayne was a puck hog. He dared you to get it from you. Mario was a bull. Get me the puck and let me light the red light. But Mario was dead meat if you played your angles right.
Puck possession is why Gretzky has an incredible plus minus.
Puck possession is why Orr does too.
Mario only had dominating puck possession on the power play.
If you go back and watch game after game you’ll clearly see this. It’s not even close.
What’s also not even close is how much puck possession Orr had compared to Wayne. Wayne was hard to get the puck from. Bobby was impossible. The other team didn’t even try. It was useless. Watch 100 games of Orr and tell me once where you see a guy dispossessed him of the puck.
@Goldenage said:
Wait. Did someone say Orr wasn’t the greatest defensive player of all time ? Lol.
Does that person know that puck possession is a teams greatest defensive asset ?
Corner wars won. Face offs won.
Puck possession is the best defensive strategy. Better than blocked shots.
Orr was the best defensive player ever by far.
Scotty Bowman instructed his teams to never skate the puck down his side, because he’d just take it away from you and head back up ice. Read that article to hear from the great Bowman, who used plus minus.
Fair points. If you include everything you've included under the heading of "defense" (I wouldn't, but it's not wrong to do so) then I agree that Orr was the greatest defensive player in history.
Would you consider dispossessing the other teams puck possession as the #1 defensive characteristic ?
Would you consider a great defensive forward a player who forechecks hard, takes the puck from the opposing team and turns his team from defense to offense ?
Bobby Orr was clearly the greatest player ever at dispossessing the other team from the puck and turning his team from defense to offense. Couple that with the other team not being able to dispossess him, makes him the greatest defensive force to ever live.
It’s why his plus minus per game is unreachable.
What is your definition of a great defensive forward or defenseman, being that you said you would not include this ?
Orr- played on good teams. Just about a +1 per game his entire career.
Bobby Clarke- good teams. +0.5 per game. Considered the greatest defensive forward ever.
Lidstrom- played on good teams. +0.3 per game.
Every other “great” player is between +0.3 to +0.5 There is NO ONE above +0.5.
As Bobby Clarke said, he needed another league. Quite honestly, Gretzky, Lemieux and any other player can’t even compare, but we all see things differently.
Orr was a dominant force. The others were just great. Plus, Orr did this all on one
Lidstrom was a very good D man, but he needs to be examined.
His entire career he played on Very Good teams. They were either dominant or very good, but nothing lower.
Why one year was Chelios a plus 40 and Lidstrom a plus 13 on a great Detroit team ? Ever see that happen with Orr ?
Why was M. Schneider a better plus minus D man over Lidstrom more than once during Lidstroms physical prime ?
They played on the same team. Lidstrom had more ice time with Datsyuk than Schneider did.
How could Lidstrom perform so bad in plus minus on great teams playing with one of the greatest defensive forwards of all time and have his own defensive teammates do better ?
This never happened with Orr. Orr blew away his teammates in plus minus. Some years Lidstrom barely could keep up with his own D men.
How could this possibly be if Lidstrom was so good ? Hmmm
If Lidstrom was fortunate enough to play on great teams, why is he #18 all time for defensemen in points per game ? Erik Karllson is ahead of him and he played for crappy Ottawa a long time.
Still waiting to hear how the best D man and O man in todays game are each 185 pounds.
Here’s a hint. Big fat men aren’t elusive. They just stand still like #8 does on the power play and say give me the puck so I can blast it.
Lidstrom was a very good D man, but he needs to be examined.
His entire career he played on Very Good teams. They were either dominant or very good, but nothing lower.
Why one year was Chelios a plus 40 and Lidstrom a plus 13 on a great Detroit team ? Ever see that happen with Orr ?
Why was M. Schneider a better plus minus D man over Lidstrom more than once during Lidstroms physical prime ?
They played on the same team. Lidstrom had more ice time with Datsyuk than Schneider did.
How could Lidstrom perform so bad in plus minus on great teams playing with one of the greatest defensive forwards of all time and have his own defensive teammates do better ?
This never happened with Orr. Orr blew away his teammates in plus minus. Some years Lidstrom barely could keep up with his own D men.
How could this possibly be if Lidstrom was so good ? Hmmm
It's almost like +/- is a terrible stat. Go figure.
Lidstrom was a very good D man, but he needs to be examined.
His entire career he played on Very Good teams. They were either dominant or very good, but nothing lower.
Why one year was Chelios a plus 40 and Lidstrom a plus 13 on a great Detroit team ? Ever see that happen with Orr ?
Why was M. Schneider a better plus minus D man over Lidstrom more than once during Lidstroms physical prime ?
They played on the same team. Lidstrom had more ice time with Datsyuk than Schneider did.
How could Lidstrom perform so bad in plus minus on great teams playing with one of the greatest defensive forwards of all time and have his own defensive teammates do better ?
This never happened with Orr. Orr blew away his teammates in plus minus. Some years Lidstrom barely could keep up with his own D men.
How could this possibly be if Lidstrom was so good ? Hmmm
It's almost like +/- is a terrible stat. Go figure.
I think the people who say plus minus is a great stat are in the same camp of the people who say it has no value.
Yes, you have to be lucky to play on very good teams your entire career.
So when you see how high Orr, Robinson, Gretzky and Clarke are in plus minus per game, who all played on good teams, and compare them to Coffey, Datsyuk, Lidstrom, Yzerman, and Lemieux, who all played on good teams, then you can ask the question about which players were the best at puck possession and puck dispossession.
Orr was a genius.
Clarke in second place.
Robinson a beast.
Gretzky an outstanding puck possession guy like Orr but not a dispossession guy like Clarke.
The stat has usefulness or the NHL would have abandoned it.
It is foolish to think it is great and it is foolish to feel it is useless.
One season Orr was a +124 I believe. Talk about records that will never be broken. His legs must have been at their best that year, because that stat stat shows nothing but overwhelming domination, which is why in my opinion, he is the greatest athlete out of all four sports, as long as we are comparing individual stats and not championships.
Ruth and Williams are too close.
Jordan and others too close.
Brady and other QB’s too close.
Orr blows away every other D men in points per game, and blows away every other NHL player all time in plus minus.
Orr dominated his sport like no other athlete ever did.
Like I said, just watch Secretariat run the Belmont. That’s Bobby Orr.
Comments
One final thought about those that talk about goalie equipment from the 1960s compared to today. Yes it was inferior, but the sticks were just as abysmal.
I coached high school ice hockey. Used a regular stick in the 80s when I’d shoot on the goalies during practice.
Decided to one day use my Paul Coffey game used stick to practice.
The puck was exploding off my stick. Like shot out of a cannon.
So while goalie equipment has improvement, sticks have improved right along with it.
I was using a wooden Coffey stick, and they did something with those things to give Al MacInnis like power.
Blew my mind the velocity that wooden stick produced.
When it's pointed out that Russell averaged only 15 a game - in an extremely high-scoring era - his defenders will say that Red Auerbach told him to not worry about scoring, that it wasn't needed. As Goldenage's comment about Lidstrom points out, this is absurd.
We're going to continue to disagree on Orr - so be it. We've made our points and still disagree.
With regard to Mario, I just look at it like this - he played through the lowest-scoring era in the NHL in 60+ years - and still is #2 in points per game.
Does defensive zone work matter ?
If it did you’d include it in your analysis. Watch the 87 Canada Cup and watch Wayne and Mario in their own end. Watch game film of how soft Mario was with Pittsburgh on defense.
Wayne is the #1 forward all time in plus minus. Mario doesn’t even crack the top 50. Even with all those points.
Both Wayne and Mario are no Bobby Clarke when it comes to defensive zone work, but Mario is way below both of them.
If you’re only going to look at points, then I agree. If you’re a half ice guy, that’s fine😉. I’m a full ice guy. Bobby 1st. Wayne 2nd. Gordie or Mario 3rd.
The theory with plus minus is that if you play for a stinky team, you’ll have a bad plus minus.
Wayne played on some great teams and some good teams. Mario the same.
The first two coaches to use the plus minus were Toe Blake and Scotty Bowman.
Scotty Bowman does agree with you that Mario is better than Wayne.
He has Mario 4th all time and Wayne #5th.
Here’s his Top 100 ever.
https://hfboards.mandatory.com/threads/scotty-bowmans-top-100-canadian-players.1299145/
.....
I see what you did there. 🤫
For my first line center, no, I don't much care about the defensive zone.
What you and I have in common is that we each have no earthly idea how many points Bobby Orr would get per season if he played today. Your point, that total offense goes up and down in different eras, is obviously true and, equally obviously, irrelevant to the question of whether Bobby Orr is the GOAT. You diverted me into a discussion of where he might rank on an offensive leaderboard, and that got us nowhere. My contention is not, and has never been, that Bobby Orr was a greater scorer than Wayne Gretzky; my contention is that he was a better hockey player than Wayne Gretzky.
So, no, Orr wouldn't put up anywhere near the numbers he did if he played today. He'd still be the GOAT most likely, but not 114 points a year.
Golden age
I'm so sorry. You have my deepest sympathies.
Very kind of you streeter. Thank you.
Still don’t think you understand Scotty Bowman comparing McDavids speed to Orr’s.
Still don’t think you understand Ken Dryden, the #2 all time save percentage guy, who played with the smaller equipment, when he talks about how he was afraid when Orr came at him because of his speed.
If Orr had Coffeys career path he’d be at 1.5 to 2 ppg.
If Orr played with Hull, #8, or Sid, he’d be at 1.5 ppg.
If Orr played with the Rangers the past ten years he’d be at 1+ ppg, depending on how much freedom the coach gave him.
Tabe and Dallas -
Answer this one question. When’s the last time you ever heard a hall of fame coach say that he saw a 13 year old kid outskating 17 year old junior hockey players in Canada ?
Read what Scotty Bowman says and afterwards please tell me that Orr doesn’t dominate in todays game.
https://www.tsn.ca/bowman-on-the-unstoppable-greatness-of-orr-1.586976?tsn-amp
Gananoque is a Junior C hockey league in Ontario. The league permits anyone from the age of 16-20 to participate in the league.
A 13 year old was outskating everyone in that league.
Bobby Orr needed another league to play in, as Bobby Clarke correctly said
Yeah, it doesn't change my opinion. McDavid is clearly the fastest player in the league - although Dylan Larkin actually holds the speed record from the All-Star competition and you can you make a case that Andreas Athanasiou is pretty much as fast - but it's not like he's constantly dancing circles around guys.
Lemme put it in sprinting terms: Bobby Orr was a 9.8 100m dash guy whose competition was 10.7 or slower (often a LOT slower). McDavid is a 9.6 or 9.7 100m dash guy whose competition is 10.0 guys.
I've said Orr would still be an excellent player, All-Star level and all that. But he ain't leading the league in scoring. Or even close to it.
You seem to be stuck on the scoring half of the game. If you've addressed the other half, I missed it. And to be fair, since Orr was a defenseman, I think you're actually ignoring more than half of his skills, and why people, including myself, consider him the GOAT.
And you keep mentioning "scoring" but Orr never led the league in goal scoring, he led the league, repeatedly, in assists. Now there may be a reasonable argument that how fast you skate helps your assist total, but what that argument is escapes me at the moment. Orr did have mad "scoring" skills, especially for a defenseman, but his strongest offensive skill was his passing, and that skill was completely unrelated to his speed, and completely independent of his era.
Explain to us why a guy who is as fast or faster than McDavid, has the elusiveness of Gretzky, and passes as good or better than Adam Oates wouldn’t obtain a high point total if he, like Paul Coffey, played over half his career with Gretzky and Mario ?
Like I said, Orr was so good he’d average 1.5 to 2.0 points per game easily for his career under that scenario, and if healthy would be second to Gretzky in all time assists.
Love how you disregarded a 13 year old dominating 16 to 20 year olds in junior. From a hall of fame coach even.
I’m sure you know that all these wonderful skaters today would be slow and awkward in Orr’s day.
Dylan Larkin would be stumbling as much as Brad Park did. The blade was thin and there was no ankle support like today. Kids today are taught edge control, using the inside and outside of the blade to learn balancing techniques to improve skills. With the ankle support they have, they are able to accomplish these skills.
In 1970 the thin blade only allowed you to skate like a robot. If you tried to execute Gretzky’s sharp turns on your inside or outside edge you were doomed to fail. With no ankle support and a thin skating blade along with no helmet you can understand why players look so awful and slow back then.
Here’s a 100 percent fact for you. If Gretzky played during the 50s, he wouldn’t be as good as Howe or the Rocket. Mario would simply be a right handed Beliveau.
All your skaters today would be those 16-20 year old junior players that Orr would be skating circles around. Only McDavid would have a chance to play with him.
Table- Please answer this one question for me.
Do you understand the great physical advantage biologically an advanced freshman athlete in college has over a 5 foot 2 thirteen year old in eight grade ?
Do you understand how physically superior he is, and do you acknowledge that it would take an extremely gifted 13 year old to dominate him and his athletic friends in hockey, soccer, basketball, football, or swimming for that matter.
That’s why people were so overwhelmed by Orr, not only in junior, but also in the NHL. He simply needed a better league to play in.
95% of autographs are fake
........
I'm no expert. But it seems as though many would be. Even just considering auto pens, or managers who sign for clients, etc. That's on top of all the straight forgeries.
Ok I have watched HK for a very long time and tons of film from the 1950's. I love C McDavid. A true generational talent.
However, he was not just named HK most complete player. Crosby was (love him also!!!!). Or the man fellow NHLers would want on their team. Yes he was the man for just one important game. If the NHL had waited a few years, he would easily have made the 100 greatest. I totally agree the average player of today is so much better than years ago. Watch a game from 1954 and see Rocket skate with his straight broomstick and just "drag" the puck on the outside as he goes by a defender. Makes a move to the net and makes one fake and sends it in on the other side. Years later Bobby Orr would do the same thing except he took the puck from behind the net. Outraced 5 defenders and skated around the net and put in in giving the goalie no chance to change sides. Hockey would never be the same. Most NHLers knew a 14 YO ORR was good enough to play in the NHL. They were waiting for him and gave him an old fashioned welcome. in 1966 when H Howell was walking away with the Norris he was told by his contemporaries to 'enjoy it' as it will be his last. It was.
Wayne Gretzky said, "the skates B Orr had worn were pitiful." Now imagine we could switch the time and the skates. everything else equal. Orr makes the scoring champion look easy and the Norris and Hart. Maybe the S Cup and C Smythe. McDavid gets named to the NHL all star 2nd team.
Now imagine we can give Bobby modern day medical and let him play on 2 good knees and play 2X longer. OMG !!!!!!!!!
Not only do we not ever have this discussion he would be recognized as the greatest team sport player ever!!!!
For me the greatest HK player all time is an easy choice. Jaw dropping Mario is #2. #99 is 3rd.
If you have never listened to L McDonald describe the 2 minutes he spent chasing Orr on a penalty kill go find it. He said, both benched were "laughing their arses" off watching it. He further said, "if B Orr didn't want you to have the puck you weren't getting it." The respect of Orr's contemporaries is similar to Beliveau except it is 100% what Orr did on the ice.
1948-76 Topps FB Sets
FB & BB HOF Player sets
1948-1993 NY Yankee Team Sets
In hockey, when referring to leading the league in "scoring", that refers to total points, not goals, not assists.
Orr isn't in the conversation as a top defensive defenseman. He's just not. His reputation comes nearly entirely from his offensive game. When people say he changed the game, they sure aren't referring to his defense. That's why I've essentially ignored it.
I don't care what Orr did when he was 13. It's irrelevant.
I have repeatedly mentioned equipment differences. Having acknowledged that, it's very obvious that today's players are significantly bigger and are significantly better athletes than Orr's contemporaries. The game itself is significantly different.
I think the use of overrated is giving people fits. I think Orr would still excel in the modern game, I just don't he'd be considered the GOAT.
Mike Gartner was just as fast as any of todays players outside of McDavid and Larkin. Bobby Orr was faster than all three of them.
Mike Bossy averaged more goals per game than Wayne Gretzky. He’s better than all your “gifted” players today too.
Ken Dryden is #2 all time in save percentage right with Hasek. Better than all your “better” athletes today.
Bobby Clarke would teach Jonathan Toews how to be the best offensive/defensive forward the game ever saw. Yzerman could attend class too. Toews and Steve Y played on great teams. Compare their plus minus to Clarkes. Ain’t even close.
Clark Gillies would first beat the crap out of #8, and then Butch Goring, and Bob Bourne would check the heck out of him, dominating him and his team.
Yeah, Gainey and Robinson would do the same.
Bigger ? Yeah, Patrick Kane and Johnny Gaudreau would strike fear in a second grader, and Dave Schultz and Bob Kelly would be no match for Brian Rafalski in the corner.
Derain Hatcher, the worst skater on team USA in that huge Cup win over Canada in 1996 was the best D man in the tournament, and Larry Robinson and his Canadiens and the 60s Canadiens would skate circles around him.
Jean Beliveau was small. Bobby Hull was not strong. Brett must have done roids to get so big, because dad as you think was pee wee Herman.
Brad Marchand is a giant. After Frank Mahovlich skated circles around him, Brad could stand up and be able to tie the Big Ms skates.
Why is Steve Yzerman only the #50 all time forward in plus minus ? He’s so powerful compared to little Gordie Howe.
Must I go on with more silliness ?
Tell you what. I’ll stop if you do.
Yeah. Connor McDavid and todays gang are in so much better shape then the athletes of yesteryear.
Todays great skaters only care about conditioning. That’s why they’re so much better. Has nothing to do with equipment. They only train and eat healthy .
The fact you mentioned plus/minus - twice - as if it's somehow an important stat or one that anybody with any hockey knowledge cares about is funny.
Yes, bigger. You're delusional if you think NHL players are not bigger and better athletes than the players of yore. On average, of course.
Brad Marchand is a midget in today's game. He's the same size as Rocket Richard.
In 1960, the Stanley Cup champion Montreal Canadiens had TWO players on their roster over 6'0" tall. And five guys exactly 6'0". They had ONE player over 200 lbs - and he was 205.
The defending Stanley Cup champion Tampa Bay Lightning have six players on their roster 6'0" or SMALLER. They have THIRTEEN guys 198 lbs or heavier, including SIX guys that are 225 or bigger.
But, sure, the old-time guys were just as big and strong.
Yes, the same Lightning team that got swept in the first by an overall smaller Columbus team two years ago. Overall size didn’t seem to matter then.
You do realize the games all time leading scorer was 185 pounds when wet ?
You also realize that the two fastest skaters ever in Orr and McDavid are both under 200 lbs ?
How could Gretzky be so great and be so small ? How could Orr and McDavid ?
But size is so important, right ?
I must reconsider this size thing.
Just so I'm clear on what you're saying, you are talking about a defenseman and ignoring his defense? That's why we're talking past each other: I'm talking about hockey, you're talking about scoring. And no, Orr wasn't the greatest defensive player of all time, but he was a great defensive player, and a game changing offensive player. The combination of the two - what we hockey fans like to call a hockey player - was, IMO, the GOAT.
There was a thread a while back about who would win, a team of five Gretzkys or a team of five Orrs (given equal goaltending behind them). My opinion, shared by most in that thread, was that the Orr team would win easily. I think a team of five Orrs would beat a team of five anyones, and I struggle to think of anyone who could even compete with the Orr team. The man was fantastic at every aspect of the game. If he played today, he would be fantastic at every aspect of the game. Whether or not he was, or would be today, #1 at ANY aspect of the game is irrelevant; it's the total package that matters.
You’re right. Size is important.
Chara won just one Norris trophy.
Chris Pronger only one also.
Adam Fox at 185 pounds when wet won his first of perhaps many last year.
I’m beginning to understand this size thing more clearly now.
Nolan Ryan was a marginal pitcher.
Do you happen to have a shirtless picture of Tim Horton?
Bobby Hull wasn't strong?? Right on. Either was Arnold
1948-76 Topps FB Sets
FB & BB HOF Player sets
1948-1993 NY Yankee Team Sets
Oh dear me I’m so confused now Tabe. Please help us all understand this size thing better. Please.
How did a 165 pound string bean win 6 vezina trophies when all the other goalies were bigger than him ?
He’s the all time save percentage leader too.
Please help.
That opinion can't be unpopular because it doesn't mean anything. Define "marginal", and list some pitchers you consider comparable.
Wait. Did someone say Orr wasn’t the greatest defensive player of all time ? Lol.
Does that person know that puck possession is a teams greatest defensive asset ?
Corner wars won. Face offs won.
Puck possession is the best defensive strategy. Better than blocked shots.
Orr was the best defensive player ever by far.
Scotty Bowman instructed his teams to never skate the puck down his side, because he’d just take it away from you and head back up ice. Read that article to hear from the great Bowman, who used plus minus.
... {nothing to see here} ...
Fair points. If you include everything you've included under the heading of "defense" (I wouldn't, but it's not wrong to do so) then I agree that Orr was the greatest defensive player in history.
You have a weird definition of "much smaller". That Columbus team had 19 different guys suit up who were 6'2" or taller, 5 guys 215 or heavier. They were a touch smaller than Tampa, not "much smaller".
You're right - size doesn't matter at all. That must be why every GM in the NHL actively seeks guys who are 5'7" and the average NHL player has gotten smaller over the years. Except, they don't and they haven't.
When talking about Orr, you definitely have to look at the full package. All I said was he's not in the conversation for greatest defensive defenseman ever - something you agreed with. But his teams never finished higher than 3rd in GAA. They were 8th once, 6th a couple times and dead last his rookie year. You'd think they'd have been higher at least once or twice.
Oh, that's an easy win for the Orr team for sure. Orr was a more complete player, no question.
Scotty basically invented the stat though he tracked it slightly differently. It's also been clearly shown to be basically meaningless. Wayne Gretzky has the 3rd highest +/- season ever and he needed a map to find his own defensive zone. Doug Smith, a completely forgotten by the mists of time, is 4th with a season of +98. Moritz Seider has a -10 this year for a bad Detroit team. Looks terrible, until you realize he's actually +10 when Detroit has a goalie in their net. And so on.
Is it fair to say that if we compared Mario Lemieux and Wayne Gretzky’s best four seasons where their teams let up a similar amount of goals, and we found that one player had a much better plus minus, would you admit that one player was better than the other defensively ?
Please consider that Wayne Gretzky’s greatest strength in having such a great plus minus even though he rarely played “strong” defense was his puck possession skills. His elusiveness in tight spaces was incredible. I saw Mario play a lot in person. Mario was a huge smoker until he got cancer. It’s part of the French culture in Canada as we’ve seen recently with Bossy and LaFluer. Mario was out of gas a lot during shifts. The guy was big and strong, but if you closed him down he’d dump the puck off. Wayne would side step you. Wayne was a puck hog. He dared you to get it from you. Mario was a bull. Get me the puck and let me light the red light. But Mario was dead meat if you played your angles right.
Puck possession is why Gretzky has an incredible plus minus.
Puck possession is why Orr does too.
Mario only had dominating puck possession on the power play.
If you go back and watch game after game you’ll clearly see this. It’s not even close.
What’s also not even close is how much puck possession Orr had compared to Wayne. Wayne was hard to get the puck from. Bobby was impossible. The other team didn’t even try. It was useless. Watch 100 games of Orr and tell me once where you see a guy dispossessed him of the puck.
He needed another league.
Would you consider dispossessing the other teams puck possession as the #1 defensive characteristic ?
Would you consider a great defensive forward a player who forechecks hard, takes the puck from the opposing team and turns his team from defense to offense ?
Bobby Orr was clearly the greatest player ever at dispossessing the other team from the puck and turning his team from defense to offense. Couple that with the other team not being able to dispossess him, makes him the greatest defensive force to ever live.
It’s why his plus minus per game is unreachable.
What is your definition of a great defensive forward or defenseman, being that you said you would not include this ?
It’s not even close.
Orr- played on good teams. Just about a +1 per game his entire career.
Bobby Clarke- good teams. +0.5 per game. Considered the greatest defensive forward ever.
Lidstrom- played on good teams. +0.3 per game.
Every other “great” player is between +0.3 to +0.5 There is NO ONE above +0.5.
As Bobby Clarke said, he needed another league. Quite honestly, Gretzky, Lemieux and any other player can’t even compare, but we all see things differently.
Orr was a dominant force. The others were just great. Plus, Orr did this all on one
I’ll also say this.
Lidstrom was a very good D man, but he needs to be examined.
His entire career he played on Very Good teams. They were either dominant or very good, but nothing lower.
Why one year was Chelios a plus 40 and Lidstrom a plus 13 on a great Detroit team ? Ever see that happen with Orr ?
Why was M. Schneider a better plus minus D man over Lidstrom more than once during Lidstroms physical prime ?
They played on the same team. Lidstrom had more ice time with Datsyuk than Schneider did.
How could Lidstrom perform so bad in plus minus on great teams playing with one of the greatest defensive forwards of all time and have his own defensive teammates do better ?
This never happened with Orr. Orr blew away his teammates in plus minus. Some years Lidstrom barely could keep up with his own D men.
How could this possibly be if Lidstrom was so good ? Hmmm
If Lidstrom was fortunate enough to play on great teams, why is he #18 all time for defensemen in points per game ? Erik Karllson is ahead of him and he played for crappy Ottawa a long time.
Still waiting to hear how the best D man and O man in todays game are each 185 pounds.
Here’s a hint. Big fat men aren’t elusive. They just stand still like #8 does on the power play and say give me the puck so I can blast it.
It's almost like +/- is a terrible stat. Go figure.
I think the people who say plus minus is a great stat are in the same camp of the people who say it has no value.
Yes, you have to be lucky to play on very good teams your entire career.
So when you see how high Orr, Robinson, Gretzky and Clarke are in plus minus per game, who all played on good teams, and compare them to Coffey, Datsyuk, Lidstrom, Yzerman, and Lemieux, who all played on good teams, then you can ask the question about which players were the best at puck possession and puck dispossession.
Orr was a genius.
Clarke in second place.
Robinson a beast.
Gretzky an outstanding puck possession guy like Orr but not a dispossession guy like Clarke.
The stat has usefulness or the NHL would have abandoned it.
It is foolish to think it is great and it is foolish to feel it is useless.
One season Orr was a +124 I believe. Talk about records that will never be broken. His legs must have been at their best that year, because that stat stat shows nothing but overwhelming domination, which is why in my opinion, he is the greatest athlete out of all four sports, as long as we are comparing individual stats and not championships.
Ruth and Williams are too close.
Jordan and others too close.
Brady and other QB’s too close.
Orr blows away every other D men in points per game, and blows away every other NHL player all time in plus minus.
Orr dominated his sport like no other athlete ever did.
Like I said, just watch Secretariat run the Belmont. That’s Bobby Orr.