Hart Trophy Tournament (1969-00) Round 2: 1970 Bobby Orr vs 1971 Bobby Orr

[blundluntman]

MATCHUP #1 (Round 2): Bobby Orr (1970) vs Bobby Orr (1971)

Bobby Orr (1969-70):
76 GP 33 G 87 A 120 Points | 1st in Scoring, 1st in Assists, 10th in Goals, Norris Trophy, Art Ross Trophy, 1st AST

Bobby Orr (1970-71):
78 GP 37 G 102 A 139 Points 124+/- | 2nd in Scoring, 1st in Assists, 9th in Goals, Norris Trophy, 1st AST, 1st in Defensive Point shares, 1st in +/-

Round 2 Matchups
70 Orr vs 71 Orr
76 Clarke vs 94 Fedorov
77 Lafleur vs 86 Gretzky
82 Gretzky vs 84 Gretzky
87 Gretzky vs 88 Lemieux
91 Hull vs 93 Lemieux
95 Lindros vs 98 Hasek
96 Lemieux vs 99 Jagr

Round 1 Results

Click to read more...

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

71 was statistically better, but IMO 1970 was the best season anyone has had (when factoring in playoffs).

Hart, Ross, Norris, Smythe is absurd

 

[blundluntman]

Going with 1970 Orr here. 71 is a very strong season and he put up better totals, but in 1970, he outscored the next closest non-teammate by 34 Points and his own teammate by 21 points. As a forward that'd be very impressive, as a defenseman it's almost incomprehensible.

Also, I must say I'm very upset Orr's 75 season didn't win the Hart because it would've been a bit better of an Orr vs Orr matchup imo.

 

[Killer Orcas]

71 was statistically better, but IMO 1970 was the best season anyone has had (when factoring in playoffs).

Hart, Ross, Norris, Smythe is absurd

I voted 71 but you make a great point insane to have that collection in a season just wow!

 

[Albatros]

1970 definitely, in 1971 the Bruins as a whole were that good.

 

[bobholly39]

71 was statistically better, but IMO 1970 was the best season anyone has had (when factoring in playoffs).

Hart, Ross, Norris, Smythe is absurd

I think you're supposed to exclude playoffs here, as this is hart season only. If anything - when considering regular season, the 1970 helps his case for 1971, since instead of having a post cup/smythe hangover, he came back with a vengeance next season, which is impressive.

I actually am voting 1971. It's better statistically and the +124 is incredibly impressive. Also - you could say Orr has a huge impact on his teammates that year, as he helped all of them have career years thanks to his incredible performance. Many of them improved drastically over previous season.

 

[Albatros]

Also - you could say Orr has a huge impact on his teammates that year, as he helped all of them have career years thanks to his incredible performance. Many of them improved drastically over previous season.

Still Orr alone doesn't explain seven Bruins among top ten scorers in the league. He was there also the year before and they had two. The year after three.

 

[bobholly39]

Still Orr alone doesn't explain seven Bruins among top ten scorers in the league. He was there also the year before and they had two. The year after three.

Didn't he play with pretty much all the same players all 3 years though? So those players all suck year 1, are great year 2, and suck year 3? Imo they were good all 3 years. And Orr had his best season in 1971, and the numbers back it up - and yes so did a lot of his teammates, a success he contributed to.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

I think you're supposed to exclude playoffs here, as this is hart season only. If anything - when considering regular season, the 1970 helps his case for 1971, since instead of having a post cup/smythe hangover, he came back with a vengeance next season, which is impressive.

I actually am voting 1971. It's better statistically and the +124 is incredibly impressive. Also - you could say Orr has a huge impact on his teammates that year, as he helped all of them have career years thanks to his incredible performance. Many of them improved drastically over previous season.

I agree. I think 1971 is the better choice, given that the tournament is specifically about the regular season.

If we're taking the playoffs into account - Bobby Orr's 1970 campaign might be the single greatest season in NHL history. The combination of the Hart, Art Ross, Norris and Conn Smythe might never be matched again.

But if we're talking just about the regular season, it's a different story. I don't think any player in NHL history has ever been such a dominant two-way force as Bobby Orr in 1971. To "translate" the old plus/minus data into something more understandable for modern fans - he had a GF%, at even strength, of approximately 76%. That's an unfathomable result, and is a full 10% ahead of where he was in 1970. (For context, 60-65% is a good outcome for an excellent two-way player on a strong team). Yes, the 1971 Bruins were ridiculously dominant, but (predictably) they were much stronger when Bobby Orr was on the ice - so I don't buy the explanation that his plus/minus was inflated due to the strength of his team.

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

I think you're supposed to exclude playoffs here, as this is hart season only. If anything - when considering regular season, the 1970 helps his case for 1971, since instead of having a post cup/smythe hangover, he came back with a vengeance next season, which is impressive.

I actually am voting 1971. It's better statistically and the +124 is incredibly impressive. Also - you could say Orr has a huge impact on his teammates that year, as he helped all of them have career years thanks to his incredible performance. Many of them improved drastically over previous season.

It's still 70 even excluding playoffs. Ross by a significant margin in 70 vs no Ross in 71

 

[Albatros]

Didn't he play with pretty much all the same players all 3 years though? So those players all suck year 1, are great year 2, and suck year 3? Imo they were good all 3 years. And Orr had his best season in 1971, and the numbers back it up - and yes so did a lot of his teammates, a success he contributed to.

Sure he contributed, if we look at the points the top seven scorers shared with one another we can see that Orr was always the 3rd most important contributor among themselves, always behind the offensive linemates and ahead of those from the other top line:

Esposito 152
76 Hodge
56 Cashman
46 Orr
29 Bucyk
18 McKenzie
14 Stanfield

Orr 139
46 Esposito
44 Bucyk
26 Stanfield
23 McKenzie
21 Hodge
14 Cashman

Bucyk 116
51 Stanfield
50 McKenzie
44 Orr
29 Esposito
6 Hodge
4 Cashman

Hodge 105
76 Esposito
48 Cashman
21 Orr
6 Bucyk
3 Stanfield
0 McKenzie

Cashman 79
56 Esposito
48 Hodge
14 Orr
4 Bucyk
2 Stanfield
1 McKenzie

McKenzie 77
50 Bucyk
30 Stanfield
23 Orr
18 Esposito
1 Cashman
0 Hodge

Stanfield 76
51 Bucyk
30 McKenzie
26 Orr
14 Esposito
3 Hodge
2 Cashman

 

[Johnny Tomala]

1970-71.

 

[bobholly39]

I agree. I think 1971 is the better choice, given that the tournament is specifically about the regular season.

If we're taking the playoffs into account - Bobby Orr's 1970 campaign might be the single greatest season in NHL history. The combination of the Hart, Art Ross, Norris and Conn Smythe might never be matched again.

But if we're talking just about the regular season, it's a different story. I don't think any player in NHL history has ever been such a dominant two-way force as Bobby Orr in 1971. To "translate" the old plus/minus data into something more understandable for modern fans - he had a GF%, at even strength, of approximately 76%. That's an unfathomable result, and is a full 10% ahead of where he was in 1970. (For context, 60-65% is a good outcome for an excellent two-way player on a strong team). Yes, the 1971 Bruins were ridiculously dominant, but (predictably) they were much stronger when Bobby Orr was on the ice - so I don't buy the explanation that his plus/minus was inflated due to the strength of his team.

I think if we included playoffs - both Gretzky 1984 and Gretzky 1985 can give Orr 1970 a run for his money.