@Goldenage said:
Can we tell how great MJ and Wilt were with their high ppg ?
How great Gretzky and Lemieux were with their high ppg ?
With Bobby Orr’s unreal D man ppg ?
How about Bobby Orr’s domination in plus minus per game with his average goalies compared to other NHL greats.
Can we compare those stats, or are they useless ?
You need to just let it rest. Orr may have very well been the best but that is subjective. I've followed this thread since you started it and like the concept. But it has now turned into a Bobby Orr or bust debate. I personally think Babe Ruth was the greatest (especially when you compare his "stats" to his direct peers) but that too, is subjective. It's good you love Orr and I am sure he was awesome. However. being the "best" will always be in the eye of the beholder so to speak. Good luck with your collecting. Show us some great Orr cards. I love these two:
@Goldenage said:
Can we tell how great MJ and Wilt were with their high ppg ?
How great Gretzky and Lemieux were with their high ppg ?
With Bobby Orr’s unreal D man ppg ?
How about Bobby Orr’s domination in plus minus per game with his average goalies compared to other NHL greats.
Can we compare those stats, or are they useless ?
Those stats aren't useless, but they are problematic due to the nature of the sport.
Along your line of your thinking;
Honus Wagner had 130.8 WAR as a shortstop where defensive responsibility is similar in job stature as Orr's would be, relative to their sports.
That is one of the reasons why a lot of people called Wagner the greatest player ever back then, even greater than Ruth.
The next MLB shortstops in history are:
Arod 117.....and he only played SS half his career.
Ripken 95
Vaughn 78
Yount 77
WAR has its problems but it is far more accurate than +/-.
Second place may be a tad closer to Wagner than Orr's second place, but the rest of the pack drops quickly and Wagner may have the statistical unparalleled dominance for his position that you speak of.
If we're going to say that someone is the best all time because he excelled at doing something that his position is not hired for, then Martin Brodeur is the best all time because he scored 50% more goals than any other goalie.
Wes Ferrell is another candidate. A 100 OPS+ is far better than any other pitcher if you consider Ruth as mostly a corner outfielder and Ohtani as mostly a DH for their offense. Ferrell's 108 innings in left field in 1933 shouldn't change anything.
I would look at it this way. The game goes through different eras. Some are high scoring some are low. The 80' and 90's were the equivalent to the steroid era of baseball as far as statistics are concerned. Comparing players from different eras is pretty much pointless. Put Gretzky in the brutal 50's and 60's with a weak team and his numbers are nothing like they were while he played in Edmonton on one of the greatest teams ever assembled. Same for many other players though they would adapt as they are the best of their eras for a reason.
As far as Orr goes, he was voted the perfect Hockey player for a reason. He won scoring titles and defensive titles at the same time. He is the only player that has ever done that in the sports history. He was literally the best offensive and defensive player when he played. Many other greats were pretty much useless on defense as they just skated around. An example many like to use is that if you had 5 Bobby Orrs playing 5 Gretzkys that it would be a one sided game. The 2 best offensive players from their eras but one was the greatest defensive player and the other would play hardly any defense at all. Wayne played a smooth game on offense as did Orr. Wayne on defense was non existent as Orr was vicious and would put people on the ice when needed. I honestly don't think Wayne would have survived physically the way people checked back in Orrs' era , mainly because he was a very light guy but as I said earlier the greats of all eras would adjust, but I think his numbers would take a huge hit overall.
I think we can all agree that they were at least the best of their eras, but we will never know the impact they would have playing in other eras.
I think the main reason Orr has the cult following that he has (I am a member), is that he changed the game like Babe Ruth changed baseball. He also played it so hard that he only had half of a career to show for it, but his impact was bigger than any other player ever. The perfect player can only be Orr for the reasons that I stated earlier in this long ass reply, sorry to all, but this argument needed it. I love both players and they are both at the top of hockey's hierarchy, where you place them is up to you.
Comments
Can we tell how great MJ and Wilt were with their high ppg ?
How great Gretzky and Lemieux were with their high ppg ?
With Bobby Orr’s unreal D man ppg ?
How about Bobby Orr’s domination in plus minus per game with his average goalies compared to other NHL greats.
Can we compare those stats, or are they useless ?
You need to just let it rest. Orr may have very well been the best but that is subjective. I've followed this thread since you started it and like the concept. But it has now turned into a Bobby Orr or bust debate. I personally think Babe Ruth was the greatest (especially when you compare his "stats" to his direct peers) but that too, is subjective. It's good you love Orr and I am sure he was awesome. However. being the "best" will always be in the eye of the beholder so to speak. Good luck with your collecting. Show us some great Orr cards. I love these two:
Those stats aren't useless, but they are problematic due to the nature of the sport.
Along your line of your thinking;
Honus Wagner had 130.8 WAR as a shortstop where defensive responsibility is similar in job stature as Orr's would be, relative to their sports.
That is one of the reasons why a lot of people called Wagner the greatest player ever back then, even greater than Ruth.
The next MLB shortstops in history are:
Arod 117.....and he only played SS half his career.
Ripken 95
Vaughn 78
Yount 77
WAR has its problems but it is far more accurate than +/-.
Second place may be a tad closer to Wagner than Orr's second place, but the rest of the pack drops quickly and Wagner may have the statistical unparalleled dominance for his position that you speak of.
If we're going to say that someone is the best all time because he excelled at doing something that his position is not hired for, then Martin Brodeur is the best all time because he scored 50% more goals than any other goalie.
Wes Ferrell is another candidate. A 100 OPS+ is far better than any other pitcher if you consider Ruth as mostly a corner outfielder and Ohtani as mostly a DH for their offense. Ferrell's 108 innings in left field in 1933 shouldn't change anything.
I mentioned earlier in the thread, but I’ll state again: Bobby Orr is one of my favorite players. It’s just that I like cogent arguments more.
I would look at it this way. The game goes through different eras. Some are high scoring some are low. The 80' and 90's were the equivalent to the steroid era of baseball as far as statistics are concerned. Comparing players from different eras is pretty much pointless. Put Gretzky in the brutal 50's and 60's with a weak team and his numbers are nothing like they were while he played in Edmonton on one of the greatest teams ever assembled. Same for many other players though they would adapt as they are the best of their eras for a reason.
As far as Orr goes, he was voted the perfect Hockey player for a reason. He won scoring titles and defensive titles at the same time. He is the only player that has ever done that in the sports history. He was literally the best offensive and defensive player when he played. Many other greats were pretty much useless on defense as they just skated around. An example many like to use is that if you had 5 Bobby Orrs playing 5 Gretzkys that it would be a one sided game. The 2 best offensive players from their eras but one was the greatest defensive player and the other would play hardly any defense at all. Wayne played a smooth game on offense as did Orr. Wayne on defense was non existent as Orr was vicious and would put people on the ice when needed. I honestly don't think Wayne would have survived physically the way people checked back in Orrs' era , mainly because he was a very light guy but as I said earlier the greats of all eras would adjust, but I think his numbers would take a huge hit overall.
I think we can all agree that they were at least the best of their eras, but we will never know the impact they would have playing in other eras.
I think the main reason Orr has the cult following that he has (I am a member), is that he changed the game like Babe Ruth changed baseball. He also played it so hard that he only had half of a career to show for it, but his impact was bigger than any other player ever. The perfect player can only be Orr for the reasons that I stated earlier in this long ass reply, sorry to all, but this argument needed it. I love both players and they are both at the top of hockey's hierarchy, where you place them is up to you.
Um, the "other guy, #44"? I may be wrong, but I think he may have added to the 1155 points JUST a bit.