If Orr started playing in todays NHL

[Seanconn*]

What would Bobby Orr's stats look like?

Would he be the best defenseman ever? or the greatest defenceman ever ?

Click to read more...

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

To me, the more interesting question is whether his coaches would let him play like he did. If they did, I think he'd regularly compete for the Art Ross, but not necessarily win them.

Edit: He would also get burned more often if he played that way today. The speed gap between Orr and the competition wouldn't be nearly as large today.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

he could look forward to a much longer career due to the innovation of microfracture surgery.

 

[LeBlondeDemon10]

This thread is similar to the recent Gretzky one. Will we have the same arguments between the generations? Will Orr be held in higher esteem than Gretzky or visa versa? Should be interesting.

 

[RabbinsDuck]

Initially, I'll say an absolute peak of 110 pts.

 

[OvenChicken8]

If Mike Green can score 31g in a season I can see Orr hitting 40g no problem.

Could he beat Crosby, Ovechkin, Sedin(s), or Stamkos for the Art Ross? Maybe once or twice, just like he did back then. 139 points might be stretching it, but 125-130 would be achievable.

 

[blogofmike]

I say he becomes a two-way forward and has a career similar to, but better than Fedorov.

 

[Dangler99*]

Orr would be sick. But I don't see him going by today's defensemen like he was playing in pee wee.

 

[JackSlater]

As was already said it really depends on the team's coach, much more than with Gretzky. In general I would see Orr among the few competitors for the Art Ross each year, probably somewhere around 100 points. In a year when everything goes right I could see 115-120 points.

 

[Sens Rule]

As was already said it really depends on the team's coach, much more than with Gretzky. In general I would see Orr among the few competitors for the Art Ross each year, probably somewhere around 100 points. In a year when everything goes right I could see 115-120 points.

I am not sure any coach would even attempt to mess with Orr. A lot of D-Men play really aggresive offensively and did it in junior as well. Of course without Orr in the 70's would there have been the precedent for any D-Man to get the green light to play that way?

I'll take the argument far moreso than with Gretzky and Mario that he played versus weaker players. He started off playing versus a deep talent pool in the original 6 and then even after there was 12 teams he played mostly vs the strong east, but later after he was getting 100 point years he was facing a weaker talent base. With the WHA and more NHL teams he played through the most talent diluted era probably ever. And he did faceterrible opposing players as he played over 30 minutes a night. There was no way to target him with top checkers like you can try to do with forwards. So I think his point totals were much higher than they would have been in any other era. The only Defenceman to score in a similar manner played with Mario and Gretzky when he did.

That said Orr did what he did because he could. He would not attempt to skate around for 30 seconds on the PK to kill time today, he would not attempt so many end to end rushes. It is widely reported he did not attempt to run up the scores on weak teams. Orr could possibly be even better (not in points) facing far better systems and opposition. I get the feeling Orr was not challenged really, a lot of the time. With short shifts and more of a challenge in each shift maybe he ups his game, he would not need to pace himself.

I think Orr would dominate everyone in the NHL in skating and one on one play. He no longer could play shiny or keep away. I think he would get around 100 points every year, challenge for the scoring lead and be the best player in the NHL.

 

[Trottier]

I think Orr would dominate everyone in the NHL in skating and one on one play. He no longer could play shiny or keep away. I think he would get around 100 points every year, challenge for the scoring lead and be the best player in the NHL.

Not going to quote your entire post, but great, balanced stuff, start to finish. Clearly based on observation, too. (Refreshing!)

 

[finchster]

If Orr played in the NHL today, there would be more youtube vidoes of him

 

[Sens Rule]

If Orr played in the NHL today, there would be more youtube vidoes of him

I wonder how big a star he would be today? He was a good looking guy too, but I think he would have hated being more of a celebrity than he was.

I wonder if the 24/7 media and the fact he would be a bigger star than Crosby or Ovechkin are,and probably he would be a big star in the USA like Gretzky was when he was in LA. I think he would have hid out all the time, and all off season.

 

[Trottier]

I wonder how big a star he would be today? He was a good looking guy too, but I think he would have hated being more of a celebrity than he was.

I wonder if the 24/7 media and the fact he would be a bigger star than Crosby or Ovechkin are,and probably he would be a big star in the USA like Gretzky was when he was in LA. I think he would have hid out all the time, and all off season.

Funny, was thinking of posting on the exact topic.

I promise you that Orr would hate today's celebrity media circus. He is a shy, genuinely modest guy. And no doubt, many on HF would brand him "boring" and "dull," for he comported himself as a player (and does to this very day) with the utmost reserve and respect for the game. No "burning hockey sticks," no pithy quotes. No AO or Roenick-like shlock.

Simply a game that spoke volumes where it mattered: on the ice. Which is why, in addition to an out-of-this-world skillset, many of us revere him.

 

[Reasoned Opinion]

If Orr started playing in todays NHL

...if he did, Lidstrom would not win another Norris....nor anyone else for a while.

/thread. Simply the greatest Dman EVER. What part of that is so hard to understand.....

 

[Sens Rule]

Funny, was thinking of posting on the exact topic.

I promise you that Orr would hate today's celebrity media circus. He is a shy, genuinely modest guy. And no doubt, many on HF would brand him "boring" and "dull," for he comported himself as a player (and does to this very day) with the utmost reserve and respect for the game. No "burning hockey sticks," no pithy quotes. No AO or Roenick-like shlock.

Simply a game that spoke volumes where it mattered: on the ice. Which is why, in addition to an out-of-this-world skillset, many of us revere him.

He would be like Crosby in a lot of ways, except a ton more shy. Crosby is a machine that only seems to think, talk and play hockey, and also promote hockey. I think Orr would not be that one minded and would not want to talk about hockey or anything else when he did not have to do so. Of course he would have made so much more money that he could buy a cottage and a huge house and not have to go anywhere much.

Orr is famous for holding a grudge against people that said things about him, or broke his trust. I have to think the current hockey media people and the crap that gets printed and said all the time would massively upset him. He might not be on speaking terms with a lot more reporters than Stan Fischler. He certainly would not have time for hacks and such, and there are so very many hack hockey media people.

Also Orr liked to drink at times and with the media the way it is I am sure there might be reports of him doing things while he was drinking and I think that would royally upset him. He might never ever go out on the town after the first time anything was reported to have happened.

 

[Boxscore]

Well, let's see... if you combined the best of Scott Niedermayer, Robyn Regehr, Pavel Datsyuk, Sidney Crosby and Paul Coffey you would have Bobby Orr. So, I think it's safe to say he would have a stranglehold on the Norris and would be steady 90-110 pt. player.

 

[Hardyvan123]

As was already said it really depends on the team's coach, much more than with Gretzky. In general I would see Orr among the few competitors for the Art Ross each year, probably somewhere around 100 points. In a year when everything goes right I could see 115-120 points.

I agree it would really depend on the team and coahc but I think 1150120 points would be out of his reach as the role of dmen has changed to much and the talent gap is too narrow even for the great Orr to get that many today.

That being said he could get 90 plus points in a perfect storm season but no Dman has scored more than 80 in the 21st century which says more about the role of Dmen and the game today than a lack of talent IMO.
http://www.hockey-reference.com/pla...val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&order_by=points

 

[Boxscore]

Today, Orr would be outscoring Green by 10-20 points a year and would be better all-around defensively than Lidstrom. No doubt about it.

 

[Hardyvan123]

Today, Orr would be outscoring Green by 10-20 points a year and would be better all-around defensively than Lidstrom. No doubt about it.

Agree with the Green comp, if he played in Washington before the debacle this year.

As for the Lidstrom comp are you talking about all around or defensively or overall and also Lidstrom is 40 now and I'm guessing most people are viewing this thread as Orr in his peak (rather than him coming in as an 18 yr old rookie)

 

[Boxscore]

Agree with the Green comp, if he played in Washington before the debacle this year.

As for the Lidstrom comp are you talking about all around or defensively or overall and also Lidstrom is 40 now and I'm guessing most people are viewing this thread as Orr in his peak (rather than him coming in as an 18 yr old rookie)

Orr was all-around better DEFENSIVELY than Lidstrom at his peak. And by all-around, I mean Orr could skate better, was just as intelligent, could pass and shoot better, was just as good with his stick and positionally, and played a lot more physical, blocked more shots and was a way better bodychecker. Even at his peak, as great as he was, Lidstrom did nothing better than Orr.

 

[RabbinsDuck]

IMO, if we saw a year with Orr down to 'only' 90 points, Lidstrom would have a good chance of beating him for the Norris based on defensive play. Orr was unlike Coffey in that he was 'good' defensively, maybe even 'great' at times, but he was never Liddtrom's 'perfect' in that department.

 

[RabbinsDuck]

Orr was all-around better DEFENSIVELY than Lidstrom at his peak. And by all-around, I mean Orr could skate better, was just as intelligent, could pass and shoot better, was just as good with his stick and positionally, and played a lot more physical, blocked more shots and was a way better bodychecker. Even at his peak, as great as he was, Lidstrom did nothing better than Orr.

Revisionist history - Orr was never regarded as the greatest defensive defenseman of his era, while Lidstrom has been the unanimous choice for an entire decade.

 

[Sens Rule]

I agree it would really depend on the team and coahc but I think 1150120 points would be out of his reach as the role of dmen has changed to much and the talent gap is too narrow even for the great Orr to get that many today.

That being said he could get 90 plus points in a perfect storm season but no Dman has scored more than 80 in the 21st century which says more about the role of Dmen and the game today than a lack of talent IMO.
http://www.hockey-reference.com/pla...val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&order_by=points

Green averaged a PPG for I think two seasons before this one. Lidstrom flirted with a PPG this season. I think Orr would easily surpass a PPG in today's NHL.

Positives for Orr would be the removal of the red line. This would be in his wheel house in making long passes and anticipating players breaking out. The increase in calling PPs in the Post lockout era would also help him. I think the less aggressive nature of the NHL, in terms of hooking, guys hanging on you would help him a great deal. I think he would take less penalties and not have to prove himself fighting lesser players like he did when he came up. At times he could be dirty though, like Pronger or Potvin and I think that would keep everyone honest with him.

I really think the NEW NHL post lockout is built for Orr, Gretzky and Mario to do even better than they did in their own eras. Even if they did not get the same number of points they would likely be even more effective being able to not worry about getting held and bear hugged, the removal of the red line, more PPs called.

One thing that has not been mentioned in the Gretzky thread is the hockey sense and anticipation that Orr, Mario and Gretzky had. What if it was EVEN BETTER than it was when they played. Now players play a very strict game, they are far more predictable in their actions in any situation. Would that make these 3 even better? Ripping apart the league even more because they intuitively know what everyone is going to do to an even greater degree? Or would it be the opposite, was some of their greatness being able to anticipate the random moves of all the other people on the ice, and with the stricter systems and less random moves by players not give them as much to take advantage of? I'd guess it would make them even more dangerous.

 

[Hardyvan123]

Revisionist history - Orr was never regarded as the greatest defensive defenseman of his era, while Lidstrom has been the unanimous choice for an entire decade.

Exactly what i was thinking, thanks for beating me to it.