Not to be forgotten is that Park briefly played with Orr in Orr's last Bruin season so he truly is a bridge from Orr to Bourque. If Orr had had a normal career, it is conveivable that all 3 could have been together on the Bruins.Park was obviously healthier in the knees during his time in New York. (Although I do believe his injury woes began there). Time, injuries, and wear n tear took a chunk for sure. His last few years in Boston, however, were downright admirable. He skated in a painful to watch stifflegged fashion and demonstrated that you can be an effective player later in life if you possess great hockey sense.
He was probably more physically dominant in New York, but his run in the years immediately following the trade '76 - '80 or so found him to be just out of the Robinson/Potvin tier -- probably on tier 2 with Salming, Lapointe, etc.
For the bruin's, his later years were made special not just by his courage but by his on and off ice assistance to a young defenseman named Ray Bourque.
Not to be forgotten is that Park briefly played with Orr in Orr's last Bruin season so he truly is a bridge from Orr to Bourque. If Orr had had a normal career, it is conveivable that all 3 could have been together on the Bruins.
I saw an interview on Boston TV a few uears ago with Orr, Park & Bourque. What came through is the tremendous respect they had for each other. Also, both Orr & Park commented on the freedom they were given to go on offense. Something that doesn't happen much today.
Did one really need a specific reason to trade for Park?But had Orr had a normal, healthy career its also reasonable to assume that Bruins management would not have had reason to trade for Park. At the time of the trade the writting was one the wall so far as Orr's playing days were numbered which created the need for another all-star defenceman.
Not to be forgotten is that Park briefly played with Orr in Orr's last Bruin season so he truly is a bridge from Orr to Bourque. If Orr had had a normal career, it is conveivable that all 3 could have been together on the Bruins.
Did one really need a specific reason to trade for Park?
It hasn't been mentioned, but the scary thing is that Boston passed up on Park to take Barry Gibbs first overall in the 1966 draft, with Park going second. Gibbs had a solid career (though not with Boston), but could you imagine those early 70's Bruins teams with both Park and Orr on the back end?
Even if Toronto did sign all those players, Ballard would've eventually broke their spirit and driven them all away.Toronto could have had both Orr and Park as well but passed on signing both as juniors. They also had Bruins goalie Gary Cheevers early in his career but let him go, imagine the Leafs of the 70s with a D of Orr, Park, Salming, Pat Stapleton and Rod Seiling(who they also had but traded away) and Cheevers in nets? It could've been them winning Cups in the early 70s and challenging the Habs on a yearly basis...