If Orr started playing in todays NHL

[Rhiessan71]

Orr played during the most watered down era in NHL history on a team that was ridiculously good compared to it's competition and only managed 2 cups. I hate to say it, but he's overrated in my eyes. The best defencemen ever, sure, but ppl here act like he could walk on water.

Only when Orr played, without Orr those Bruin teams were only slightly above average.
Every piece of data supports this from their win/loss record to the stats of other players from that team when Orr was not on the ice.

 

[CarlWinslow]

Really, who has said, in all seriousness, that he would be a scrub or get as low as 45 points in a year.

I really must have missed that post, enlighten us please as to which posts you are referring to.

It was a sarcastic commentary on the general opinion that many posters have exhibited over the past little while. Next time I will include the .

 

[LeBlondeDemon10]

The Babe Ruth comp was very weak for a number of reasons, the 1st being that he only played in a white league. It really would be the equivalent of a Canadian only NHL in 2010.

He also hit so many home runs because he actually was trying to do that while the convention of the times was for star players to just get on base with any hit at all.

He was no doubt a great HR hitter, and a great player overall but it is only conjecture of how dominant he would have been in another lineup or team or if other star players tried to play the long ball like he did.

True Ruth played in an all white league, but rarely does a hitter try to hit home runs. They happen naturally from the design of their swing, timing and ability to see the ball. He also has a lifetime average of .342. To suggest Ruth was the only one who was trying to hit homeruns is preposterous.
The equivalent of only Canadians in the NHL would be one player scoring all of his teams goals or something similar to that. Very few if any in sport dominated like Ruth did for a period of 3-4 years.

 

[habsjunkie2*]

Only when Orr played, without Orr those Bruin teams were only slightly above average.
Every piece of data supports this from their win/loss record to the stats of other players from that team when Orr was not on the ice.

The point still stands.

 

[Hardyvan123]

NO! It was not JUST another reason, it was the only major reason period.
All other reasons were in the minor category.




You can't have it both ways dude.

You can't sit there and say that Orr was only great because of a watered down, low European content NHL and then turn around and dismiss his strong showing against the best of that European content because they supposedly didn't "compete" well.
Make up your mind.

At the end of the day not much is made of Orr either way on his one Canada Cup.

I honesty haven't gone back and watched the 76 Canada Cup in a while or even thought about it much to say exactly how impressive his showing was there.

His legacy was in the NHL

And Orr's NHL was not watered down to the lack of any players from Europe at that point (although there were some pretty decent players in Europe at that time as well) it was more due to the NHL expanding from 6-12-12-16 teams in a short time frame (his career) and the emergence of the WHA in his last 2 full seasons that watered down the league considerably.

Orr was the best player and also benefited from playing when he did as well, the 2 things are not mutually exclusive, we can only ponder on he would have done in a 6 team NHL (still the best Dmen in that league) but with less dominance as well IMO.

 

[BraveCanadian]

Only when Orr played, without Orr those Bruin teams were only slightly above average.
Every piece of data supports this from their win/loss record to the stats of other players from that team when Orr was not on the ice.

One thing to keep in mind about this though.. and something that has been bothering me for a while is:

How much ice time did Orr get? Didn't O6 guys take 2 minute shifts sometimes?

For example, I am sure I have heard that Gordie Howe sometimes played like 45 minutes of a game?

If Orr was over 30 on average that is really going to skew his results versus modern players. Very rare a defenseman averages over 30 now and even more rare to see a forward over what.. 25?

I know people have ice time estimates based on goals for but I don't know if those take into account how players were used at the time. I think the estimates were calibrated using recent results where the icetimes were tracked.

 

[Rhiessan71]

Ok here's another thing, so what IF the League was watered down by as much as some of you say.
What's stopping the other superstar players from taking advantage of this?
Why are these superstar FOWARDS "letting" a mere D-man win 2 Art Ross?

What does a watered down league mean exactly? That it would be easier to score? What's that got to do with Orr destroying all the other superstars playing with the EXACT same advantages.

You can debate that the actual amount of points Orr potted might of been helped by a watered down league but how in the hell does that have anything to do with Orr beating everyone else and them being forwards to boots by such a large margin???


It's no different with Gretzky, so maybe he doesn't pot 200 points today but he would still get a hell of a lot more than anyone else.

Is Gretzky getting 160 points today when the next best is around 115-120 any less dominant than him getting 200 and the next best getting 150....NO IT ISN'T!

 

[JackSlater]

Orr was the best player and also benefited from playing when he did as well, the 2 things are not mutually exclusive, we can only ponder on he would have done in a 6 team NHL (still the best Dmen in that league) but with less dominance as well IMO.

Dominance in an absolute sense obviously shrinks the smaller the league gets, provided the talent level is unchanged. That is inconsequential. Orr's relative dominance compared to his peers would be pretty close to the same in a six team league. It would mean tougher competition for him, but also tougher competition for everyone else.

 

[Rhiessan71]

Dominance in an absolute sense obviously shrinks the smaller the league gets, provided the talent level is unchanged. That is inconsequential. Orr's relative dominance compared to his peers would be pretty close to the same in a six team league. It would mean tougher competition for him, but also tougher competition for everyone else.

Exactly, apparently according to most posts here, if the league was smaller and tighter, Orr would be the only player to be affected

 

[Big Phil]

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.

I'm pretty sure when you have a player with Orr's talent that the coaches let him play the way he wants. Put it this way, a GOOD coach would do that and not get all "Jacques Lemaire and Ken Hitchcock" on him.

Orr would be the best defenseman in the game. Nothing against the d-men playing in 2011 but the best right now are the likes of Lidstrom (still good), Letang and Big Buff with Chara in the mix as well. With Orr's speed, creativity, hockey sense and overall skill set there is no way a player like him wouldn't be able to dominate today

 

[Seanconn*]

I'm pretty sure when you have a player with Orr's talent that the coaches let him play the way he wants. Put it this way, a GOOD coach would do that and not get all "Jacques Lemaire and Ken Hitchcock" on him.

Orr would be the best defenseman in the game. Nothing against the d-men playing in 2011 but the best right now are the likes of Lidstrom (still good), Letang and Big Buff with Chara in the mix as well. With Orr's speed, creativity, hockey sense and overall skill set there is no way a player like him wouldn't be able to dominate today

if it was physically possible to transplant 1971 Bobby Orr with his same old equipment, but stick a helmet on him, he'd still be the most effective player 9 times out of ten.

my dad was born in 56 and watched hockey growing up a lot, and he still says Orr was the best player he's ever watched play, gretzky and lemieux he says were undoubtedly great, but they couldn't hold a candle to the spectacle Bobby Orr put on every time he stepped on the ice.

 

[seventieslord]

Ok here's another thing, so what IF the League was watered down by as much as some of you say.
What's stopping the other superstar players from taking advantage of this?
Why are these superstar FOWARDS "letting" a mere D-man win 2 Art Ross?

What does a watered down league mean exactly? That it would be easier to score? What's that got to do with Orr destroying all the other superstars playing with the EXACT same advantages.

You can debate that the actual amount of points Orr potted might of been helped by a watered down league but how in the hell does that have anything to do with Orr beating everyone else and them being forwards to boots by such a large margin???


It's no different with Gretzky, so maybe he doesn't pot 200 points today but he would still get a hell of a lot more than anyone else.

Is Gretzky getting 160 points today when the next best is around 115-120 any less dominant than him getting 200 and the next best getting 150....NO IT ISN'T!

Dominance in an absolute sense obviously shrinks the smaller the league gets, provided the talent level is unchanged. That is inconsequential. Orr's relative dominance compared to his peers would be pretty close to the same in a six team league. It would mean tougher competition for him, but also tougher competition for everyone else.

best posts in the thread.

 

[BraveCanadian]

I'm pretty sure when you have a player with Orr's talent that the coaches let him play the way he wants. Put it this way, a GOOD coach would do that and not get all "Jacques Lemaire and Ken Hitchcock" on him.

That's actually interesting because I have seen more than one quote by Orr lamenting the fact that kids aren't allowed to have fun and be creative even at a young age in hockey now. I suspect one of the reason we don't see players with the vision of Orr or Gretzky etc. is that they are literally being trained out of it.

Orr has also pointed out that yes, he was allowed to roam but that would be one of the big differences if he played today. Finding a place where he would be allowed to.

 

[Rhiessan71]

That's actually interesting because I have seen more than one quote by Orr lamenting the fact that kids aren't allowed to have fun and be creative even at a young age in hockey now. I suspect one of the reason we don't see players with the vision of Orr or Gretzky etc. is that they are literally being trained out of it.

Many retired players and people that have been close to the game for a long time mirror this opinion.
Fast skating robots trained to always make the safe play or get benched.

Orr has also pointed out that yes, he was allowed to roam but that would be one of the big differences if he played today. Finding a place where he would be allowed to.

Wouldn't be as big of a problem as you think.
Teams almost always build around and compliment those type of players.

If a team drafted an Orr/Gretzky/Lemieux level player and then hired a Hitchcock or a Lemaire type coach...that teams GM doesn't even deserve a job running a beer league team heh.

 

[BraveCanadian]

Many retired players and people that have been close to the game for a long time mirror this opinion.
Fast skating robots trained to always make the safe play or get benched.

Wouldn't be as big of a problem as you think.
Teams almost always build around and compliment those type of players.

Yeah but your first point kind of contradicts your second.

Hypothetically if Orr came up through today's training he may not have been the same as he was back then when he finally got to the NHL. There may not have been that style of play in him to build a team around.

Food for thought.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

At the end of the day not much is made of Orr either way on his one Canada Cup.

I honesty haven't gone back and watched the 76 Canada Cup in a while or even thought about it much to say exactly how impressive his showing was there.

His legacy was in the NHL

And Orr's NHL was not watered down to the lack of any players from Europe at that point (although there were some pretty decent players in Europe at that time as well) it was more due to the NHL expanding from 6-12-12-16 teams in a short time frame (his career) and the emergence of the WHA in his last 2 full seasons that watered down the league considerably.

Orr was the best player and also benefited from playing when he did as well, the 2 things are not mutually exclusive, we can only ponder on he would have done in a 6 team NHL (still the best Dmen in that league) but with less dominance as well IMO.

Being a second team all-star in the 6 team NHL as an 18 year old should give a hint of how dominant he would have been.

The other all-star Dmen that year were Harry Howell (34), Pierre Pilote (35), and Tim Horton (37).

 

[Hardyvan123]

Being a second team all-star in the 6 team NHL as an 18 year old should give a hint of how dominant he would have been.

The other all-star Dmen that year were Harry Howell (34), Pierre Pilote (35), and Tim Horton (37).

Hey there is no doubt in my mind that Orr would have still been the best Dman in a 6 team league and maybe even still lead the league in scoring but the overall level of talent in a 6 team league probably would have cut into his production somewhat IMO.

how much is really hard to say but for the guys that say that he would lead the league in scoring hands down today I don't think he would as the role of Dmen has changed quite a bit and even a guy like Orr with his vision wouldn't have the green light all of the time and the players defending him would not be like some of the pylons he played against in the late 60's and early 70's

 

[Hardyvan123]

Exactly, apparently according to most posts here, if the league was smaller and tighter, Orr would be the only player to be affected

Well this is a thread about Bobby Orr but it was pretty obvious that scoring went up overall in the years after expansion and this affected pretty much every player in the league to state the obvious.

Funny I didn't see the post where anyone said that other players would not be affected either and that it was only Orr but honestly I didn't go back to check the entire thread either.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Hey there is no doubt in my mind that Orr would have still been the best Dman in a 6 team league and maybe even still lead the league in scoring but the overall level of talent in a 6 team league probably would have cut into his production somewhat IMO.

how much is really hard to say but for the guys that say that he would lead the league in scoring hands down today I don't think he would as the role of Dmen has changed quite a bit and even a guy like Orr with his vision wouldn't have the green light all of the time and the players defending him would not be like some of the pylons he played against in the late 60's and early 70's

I wouldn't disagree with any of this. He wouldn't have scored as much if expansion didn't happen and it stayed a 6 team league.

But its still just speculation.

What makes you think he couldn't adjust to the non-pylon defenders? Maybe it was so easy with the competition he had we never even saw Orr turn it on all the way.

Just more speculation.

 

[Rhiessan71]

Yeah but your first point kind of contradicts your second.

Hypothetically if Orr came up through today's training he may not have been the same as he was back then when he finally got to the NHL. There may not have been that style of play in him to build a team around.

Food for thought.

Naw, it doesn't contradict it at all. Orr himself benefited from an early coach that instead of doing the norm, took Orr and put him on D and not only let him play his game but encouraged it.
If the same happened today and the team drafting him employed an uber conservative, boring coach, it would be a very bad hockey decision.

Also, lets get something straight here.
A lot of you folks seem to forget that before Orr came along there was no such thing as a rushing D-man.
Saying he would be more restricted today as a rushing D-man today...that's a joke, when Orr came up such a thing wasn't just restricted, it was absolutely unheard of.
D-men today can get benched for pinching at the wrong time, in Orr's day a D-man got benched for pinching period.

 

[vulture77]

Orr was easily the best player in the world in the 70's, evidenced by Canada Cup 76 where he won both the scoring title and the very deservedly the tournamen's best player award award against the Soviets.

I would think Orr in the modern NHL would get around 30 goals, 90 assists, about 110 points to contest for the art ross.

 

[Rhiessan71]

Well this is a thread about Bobby Orr but it was pretty obvious that scoring went up overall in the years after expansion and this affected pretty much every player in the league to state the obvious.

Funny I didn't see the post where anyone said that other players would not be affected either and that it was only Orr but honestly I didn't go back to check the entire thread either.

You're still missing the point and you didn't have to expressly state that Orr would be the only one affected. The tone of your posts said as much, like a drop in league scoring would suddenly keep Orr from the Art Ross or drop him from the top 5 in scoring every year when the other players points would drop the same.
It has nothing to do with how high scoring was or how many points Orr got.
He still beat out every other star forward in the league playing under the exact same conditions.

If league scoring was lower then maybe instead of Orr winning the Art Ross in 69/70 120-99, he wins it 110-93 and in 74/75 he wins it 125-117 instead of 135-127.

The bottomline is still a big fat SO WHAT!
He is still the only D-man to win an Art Ross let alone two and still dominated every other star and super star forward in the league playing under the exact same conditions.
End of story.

 

[Hardyvan123]

You're still missing the point and you didn't have to expressly state that Orr would be the only one affected. The tone of your posts said as much, like a drop in league scoring would suddenly keep Orr from the Art Ross or drop him from the top 5 in scoring every year when the other players points would drop the same.
It has nothing to do with how high scoring was or how many points Orr got.
He still beat out every other star forward in the league playing under the exact same conditions.

If league scoring was lower then maybe instead of Orr winning the Art Ross in 69/70 120-99, he wins it 110-93 and in 74/75 he wins it 125-117 instead of 135-127.

The bottomline is still a big fat SO WHAT!
He is still the only D-man to win an Art Ross let alone two and still dominated every other star and super star forward in the league playing under the exact same conditions.
End of story.

Just to be clear, I believe that scoring levels at different times would affect all players to a lesser or greater degree, depending on the player and era.

True Orr is the only Dman to ever win a scoring title but to translate that into a Art Ross in 2010 and beyond is pure speculation and a bit of a stretch IMO.

Look generational players like Orr, Gretzky and even Lemieux were all super great talents but they also needed a small element of luck of timing, team and players that played with them to truly excel statistically and dominate.

There are many Dmen in the NHL today that are closer to Orr skill wise than in the time period he played in yet none of them are even close to winning an Art Ross.

The role of Dmen and the game has changed so much in the NHL that even a talent like Orr would have great difficulty in winning an Art Ross never mind being a top scorer IMO.

Green is probably the most gifted offensive Dman who played in the best system and had the best opportunity in the last 10 years and the best he could manage would have been an 3 way for 9th in scoring if he had stayed healthy and maintained his pace.

Green's best is actually a 20th place in 10.

Sure Orr probably could best Green but I'm not confident that he would be breaking the century mark in todays NHL with any regular success even on the perfect team and situation for him..

This is not meant as a slight to Orr but to the reality to the talent level and the way the game is played today and the role of Dmen in that game.

 

[Rhiessan71]

Look generational players like Orr, Gretzky and even Lemieux were all super great talents but they also needed a small element of luck of timing, team and players that played with them to truly excel statistically and dominate.

Of course, never debated that.

There are many Dmen in the NHL today that are closer to Orr skill wise than in the time period he played in yet none of them are even close to winning an Art Ross.

Who??? Name a single d-man that is near or at the top of the league in skating, shooting, passing,stickhandleing, hitting, hockey sense and playing defense. Not just some of these, ALL of them.
The answer is NONE and there hasn't been any since Orr. The closest player to Orr in total talent and skillset was Lemieux and even he wasn't as fast, as physical or as defensively dominant.

Orr was the ultimate hockey player and we haven't seen the like since.

The role of Dmen and the game has changed so much in the NHL that even a talent like Orr would have great difficulty in winning an Art Ross never mind being a top scorer IMO.

Art Ross is debatable of course but top 10 scorer...no problem.

Green is probably the most gifted offensive Dman who played in the best system and had the best opportunity in the last 10 years and the best he could manage would have been an 3 way for 9th in scoring if he had stayed healthy and maintained his pace.

Green's best is actually a 20th place in 10.

Sure Orr probably could best Green but I'm not confident that he would be breaking the century mark in todays NHL with any regular success even on the perfect team and situation for him.

.

Don't compare Green with Orr, that's not even remotely close. That's like comparing Housley with Bourque or Lidstrom.

This is not meant as a slight to Orr but to the reality to the talent level and the way the game is played today and the role of Dmen in that game.

You mean the role he created

 

[DisgruntledGoat*]

The role of Dmen and the game has changed so much in the NHL that even a talent like Orr would have great difficulty in winning an Art Ross never mind being a top scorer IMO.

At what point was the game geared towards defensemen winning scoring titles???