Orr Vs Gretzky

[85highlander]

3 gretzky's and 2 doug harvey's should school 5 bobby orrs. Gretzky provides more offense, doug harvey is better defensviely.

This would be a much better match up, and one that would be highly competitive, though I believe it would be close. The Orr's win in seven hard fought games with the Bobbys taking it in OT on a flying Orr goal as Harvey trips him...

 

[quasi1981]

well yeah, the five orrs vs. five gretzkys scenario means nothing because in the real world you can't play clones. however, it's an interesting thought experiment in that it shows that bobby orr is probably able to excel in more situations than gretzky.

in a hypothetical scenario-- let's say you have a legit top four guy as your seventh d-man and you've just lost your top two centers to injury and you're in a game seven. orr would be a fantastic first line center in a pinch, or a grinding left winger, or he can play a scott stevens role if needed, or a mike bossy role, etc. gretzky didn't have that versatility, and i honestly don't think he could play many roles other than being gretzky. this doesn't prove that orr is the better player, but it does show that he has facets to his game that gretzky doesn't.

but i will also say that what gretzky did in his prime, which was to make every other guy on the ice a dangerous scoring option while outpacing the next highest scoring guy (teammates/linemates included) by more than 3/2, is something i don't think anyone else in history-- including orr as a forward-- could do. or could have easily been a hall of fame center, but i doubt he could have been gretzky.

Orr's greatest gift was making all the players around him better "players" not just scorers, and all of them were much better scorers because of #4.

He led the league in assists in the last 5 of 6 years in good health, and Espo beat him by 3 in the year 72-73.

And he was playing D. It took him a few years to get the full game going offensively though he was by far the best offensive overall player to ever lace up, and after that he scored many goals but he was the greatest team player ever because to be a great team player, one has to at least try to play a complete game. He was moving so fast and spent very little time deep in the opposing teams end and still was the greatest passer ever. He couldn't just sit behind the net and look for people to pass to. He would have if he had been made a center which the Bs almost did, and chose the D as his place.

To say he was not a complete player, or maybe the greatest offensive threat ever? He was a great offensive player deep in his own end the way he got the puck out of his zone with ease and was always a huge threat to score no matter where he was on the ice, starting fast breaks out of his end going by and around players like they were not moving.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

It may have had a little to do with #4. Espo was not a great player or scorer before and after playing for Boston.

He wasn't as great as when he was with Orr, but he was still 7th in league scoring before being trading to Boston. And he was Canada's best player in the 72 Summit series without Orr.

There really is no need to downplay the accomplishments of Espo to push for Bobby Orr.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

3 gretzky's and 2 doug harvey's should school 5 bobby orrs. Gretzky provides more offense, doug harvey is better defensviely.

Let's try to agree on the best possible lineup ever. I have two candidates:

Lemieux - Gretzky - Howe
Orr - Orr

Lemieux - Gretzky - Howe
Orr - Harvey

I think Lemieux, Gretzky, and Howe on the same line would be better than 3 clones of either, since they all bring something a little different. The question is: 2 Bobby Orrs or 1 Orr and 1 Harvey? 2 Orrs is obviously more talented, but is there enough puck to go around?

 

[Canadiens1958]

The Other Part of the Story

On the last sentence, maybe so, but Orr was a center to start till 11 and 12 when Bucko McDonald, and ex NHL Dman thought that Orr's charging way of skating would be great as a Dman, so he taught him to be a great Dman.

He was an allstar at either end of the ice. If they had made him a forward, with his backchecking abilty, he would still have dug the puck out of his own end and started a rush as he was a far better skater and puckhandler along with allusiveness.

The other part of the story is that by moving Orr to defense Bucko McDonald got much more ice time for his best player while having him play with each teammate every game as opposed to just his two linemates and defensemen. Thereby the team received a huge benefit.

 

[Fourier]

Bobby Orr live was a treat to watch. First saw him live with the Oshawa Generals against the Scotty Bowman coached Junior Canadiens when Bobby Orr was 15 and then almost everytime he played in Montreal, 1nc. the 1976 Canada Cup plus a few times in Boston and Toronto.

See Bobby Orr on TV or video is very misleading since you are watching in 2-D on a reduced surface a game that was played in 3-d on a 200' x 85' rink. In person, especially from the end behind the player you get an excellent perspective of how he sees and plays the game.

Also in person you get a clear understanding of how the smaller Boston Garden rink crimped Bobby Orr's game. How much more difficult he was to cover on the regulation Forum or MLG ice surface.

There really is no substitute for watching any great player live.

 

[85highlander]

Let's try to agree on the best possible lineup ever. I have two candidates:

Lemieux - Gretzky - Howe
Orr - Orr

Lemieux - Gretzky - Howe
Orr - Harvey

I think Lemieux, Gretzky, and Howe on the same line would be better than 3 clones of either, since they all bring something a little different. The question is: 2 Bobby Orrs or 1 Orr and 1 Harvey? 2 Orrs is obviously more talented, but is there enough puck to go around?

I suppose this would really depend on what style one would prefer, though either one of those lineups would probably trump an all Orr or an all Gretzky lineup.

The one scenario that all hockey fans missed out on would have been to watch any team with one Orr vs. another team with one Gretzky. That would have been a marvelous site to behold.

 

[BostonAJ]

Let's try to agree on the best possible lineup ever. I have two candidates:

Lemieux - Gretzky - Howe
Orr - Orr

Lemieux - Gretzky - Howe
Orr - Harvey

Orr-Orr beats Orr-Harvey. Don't see that as debatable. This is getting weird.

 

[canucks4ever]

Let's try to agree on the best possible lineup ever. I have two candidates:

Lemieux - Gretzky - Howe
Orr - Orr

Lemieux - Gretzky - Howe
Orr - Harvey

I think Lemieux, Gretzky, and Howe on the same line would be better than 3 clones of either, since they all bring something a little different. The question is: 2 Bobby Orrs or 1 Orr and 1 Harvey? 2 Orrs is obviously more talented, but is there enough puck to go around?

Well, the only time lemieux played on wing is canada cup 87, if you want the best line up possible it would be better to have it by actual position.

Hull- gretzky or lemieux- Howe
Orr- Harvey
Hasek

Even though i rank bourque above harvey, harvey is the better defender so i would pick him for the second spot.

 

[canucks4ever]

He wasn't as great as when he was with Orr, but he was still 7th in league scoring before being trading to Boston. And he was Canada's best player in the 72 Summit series without Orr.

There really is no need to downplay the accomplishments of Espo to push for Bobby Orr.

Yeah but you have to remember he was playing on the 1967 blackhawks. Everyone on that team racked up big numbers that season, even pilote and wharram.

By actual accomplishments on paper, espo is right up there with bobby hull. They both have the same accomplishments, but esposito only put up big numbers on the bruins open firewagon system. He also seems less impressive on film.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

Orr's greatest gift was making all the players around him better "players" not just scorers, and all of them were much better scorers because of #4.

He led the league in assists in the last 5 of 6 years in good health, and Espo beat him by 3 in the year 72-73.

And he was playing D. It took him a few years to get the full game going offensively though he was by far the best offensive overall player to ever lace up, and after that he scored many goals but he was the greatest team player ever because to be a great team player, one has to at least try to play a complete game. He was moving so fast and spent very little time deep in the opposing teams end and still was the greatest passer ever. He couldn't just sit behind the net and look for people to pass to. He would have if he had been made a center which the Bs almost did, and chose the D as his place.

To say he was not a complete player, or maybe the greatest offensive threat ever? He was a great offensive player deep in his own end the way he got the puck out of his zone with ease and was always a huge threat to score no matter where he was on the ice, starting fast breaks out of his end going by and around players like they were not moving.

i'm not sure how the above makes any sense as a response to my post that you quoted.

but i will reiterate that as great as orr was, and i do think that he was a greater player than gretzky, i don't think he could have been as great a center as gretzky was. he was one of the greatest playmakers of all time, but to my eyes, his offensive vision was not at gretzky's level. orr made the players around him better, of course. no one doubts that. but almost every time he was in the offensive zone, all five oilers were credible goal scoring threats and had to be paid close attention to by the defending team because at any point gretzky could have made a great play to any of them. i have never seen anything like it.

 

[quasi1981]

He wasn't as great as when he was with Orr, but he was still 7th in league scoring before being trading to Boston. And he was Canada's best player in the 72 Summit series without Orr.

There really is no need to downplay the accomplishments of Espo to push for Bobby Orr.

I just said he was a much better player with Orr, and a first team allstar, and not so great without him. And not nearly as great an offensive threat. No one was.

 

[quasi1981]

Let's try to agree on the best possible lineup ever. I have two candidates:

Lemieux - Gretzky - Howe
Orr - Orr

Lemieux - Gretzky - Howe
Orr - Harvey

I think Lemieux, Gretzky, and Howe on the same line would be better than 3 clones of either, since they all bring something a little different. The question is: 2 Bobby Orrs or 1 Orr and 1 Harvey? 2 Orrs is obviously more talented, but is there enough puck to go around?

that's my whole point. Orr was so unselfish, and to have him play all the positions, you never know which one needs to step up. He did everything you could ever ask anyone, and was never looking for any accolades. He was not just a great one on one player.

 

[quasi1981]

The other part of the story is that by moving Orr to defense Bucko McDonald got much more ice time for his best player while having him play with each teammate every game as opposed to just his two linemates and defensemen. Thereby the team received a huge benefit.

Absolutely, and he could do everything and was on all power plays and shorthanded situations, and would give you and offensive lift in penalty killing, which also meant he would offensively skate all over he ice for most of a penallty, in and out of either teams zones then back out again while 2 or 3 guys tried to catch him to no avail. and you know if you saw him that this is no exaggeration.

 

[Scott1980]

Yeah, to be honest, Gretzky wasn't even the second best player that year, Yzerman was.

As far as Orr not winning more Hart's, that really just comes down to media bias in that some feel that Dmen and Goalies already have an award and the Hart should more likely go to a forward.
Not to mention the politicking and if one thing that Espo had over Orr was that he could talk about himself better than most.
Always been this way and always will.

1989? Gretz was THE second best player, Yzerman, third.

Bernie Nicholls was forth with a career high 150 points Y had 5 more points total! Explain?

Then Bernie he got 75 points in 47 games the next year, got traded away...and was never the same!

BTW Gretz deserved the Conn in '84 and '87 as well, he was robbed. Plus he deserved rookie of the year in 79/80. Then their are the points and assists total from his first year which don't count. They do in my book.

63 records, not 61!

7 Stanley Cups I said earlier? Naw. He'd have won about 10 if not for goaltending and the trade.

 

[quasi1981]

Orr-Orr beats Orr-Harvey. Don't see that as debatable. This is getting weird.

It's hard for most people who never saw him to realize how much better he was than anyone else. Even all the players said it was like he was a pro and they were Junior Hockey, he was otherworldly. So they make up scenarios to find other great players who could have teamed up with The G One. Orr was super at everything and he had a hugely high Hockey IQ and the ultimate team player, never calling attention to himself, so very humble.

 

[quasi1981]

i'm not sure how the above makes any sense as a response to my post that you quoted.

but i will reiterate that as great as orr was, and i do think that he was a greater player than gretzky, i don't think he could have been as great a center as gretzky was. he was one of the greatest playmakers of all time, but to my eyes, his offensive vision was not at gretzky's level. orr made the players around him better, of course. no one doubts that. but almost every time he was in the offensive zone, all five oilers were credible goal scoring threats and had to be paid close attention to by the defending team because at any point gretzky could have made a great play to any of them. i have never seen anything like it.

It was exactly like that with Orr, a defenseman who in his prime, his last 6 years of relatively good health, he led the league in assists, and finished second once to Espo. He was the ultimate player, making his mates equally as dangerous as Gretzky did, and he was a Dman, but was also a center in his formative years. You don't blow away all the great forwards in hockey by winning the assists title almost 6 straight years, and many goals were set up by him where he found mismatches and 3 passes later, a goal. It is not all about stats. He could have matched Gretzky as a center and scored as many points if he played it.

None of you seem to get it. He is the 4th leading scorer in points per game of all time, meaning as a defensemen, he has to be strongly considered as the greatest offensive player of all time, because no only could he score, but did so many things on offense that Gretzky couldn't and wouldn't do, and Orr was so limited in his time out in front of the net and behind it to make infinitely less plays up close, and yet he is right there as an alltime scorer.

 

[quasi1981]

i'm not sure how the above makes any sense as a response to my post that you quoted.

but i will reiterate that as great as orr was, and i do think that he was a greater player than gretzky, i don't think he could have been as great a center as gretzky was. he was one of the greatest playmakers of all time, but to my eyes, his offensive vision was not at gretzky's level. orr made the players around him better, of course. no one doubts that. but almost every time he was in the offensive zone, all five oilers were credible goal scoring threats and had to be paid close attention to by the defending team because at any point gretzky could have made a great play to any of them. i have never seen anything like it.

Orr was like a surfer where you can't turn around to see the wave, you have to feel it. Orr had unbelievable vision, he could feel everything all around him, making plays flying down the ice at mach 15. He'd fall or tripped in the O zone, and intuitively with his back to the goal, lying on his side, reach with his stick and slide it towards the goal right on your stick, and a pass later a goal, because he demanded so much attention.

I see it as Orr has all the essential talent the G one has, but the G one has very little of the talent Orr had. It is why almost everyone who saw them both takes Orr

 

[quasi1981]

1989? Gretz was THE second best player, Yzerman, third.

Bernie Nicholls was forth with a career high 150 points Y had 5 more points total! Explain?

Then Bernie he got 75 points in 47 games the next year, got traded away...and was never the same!

BTW Gretz deserved the Conn in '84 and '87 as well, he was robbed. Plus he deserved rookie of the year in 79/80. Then their are the points and assists total from his first year which don't count. They do in my book.

63 records, not 61!

7 Stanley Cups I said earlier? Naw. He'd have won about 10 if not for goaltending and the trade.

Same with Orr, if not for Ken Dryden, Orr would have probably won 6 titles. the best goalie, when it was clutch time I ever saw, and his Canadians were not that good.

 

[RabbinsDuck]

It was exactly like that with Orr, a defenseman who in his prime, his last 6 years of relatively good health, he led the league in assists, and finished second once to Espo. He was the ultimate player, making his mates equally as dangerous as Gretzky did, and he was a Dman, but was also a center in his formative years. You don't blow away all the great forwards in hockey by winning the assists title almost 6 straight years, and many goals were set up by him where he found mismatches and 3 passes later, a goal. It is not all about stats. He could have matched Gretzky as a center and scored as many points if he played it.

None of you seem to get it. He is the 4th leading scorer in points per game of all time, meaning as a defensemen, he has to be strongly considered as the greatest offensive player of all time, because no only could he score, but did so many things on offense that Gretzky couldn't and wouldn't do, and Orr was so limited in his time out in front of the net and behind it to make infinitely less plays up close, and yet he is right there as an alltime scorer.

Plenty of players would be ahead of Orr in PPG if you only count their first 12 seasons. Orr's playmaking, while one of the best ever, is still leagues behind Gretzky.... And obviously his goal scoring is far short.

Orr is not in this discussion on offense alone. Coffey is right there in the ballpark.

 

[Scott1980]

Same with Orr, if not for Ken Dryden, Orr would have probably won 6 titles. the best goalie, when it was clutch time I ever saw, and his Canadians were not that good.

Except in 1969, 1972, 1975 and 1979 against USSR!

 

[canucks4ever]

I like bobby orr, but this website overglorifies him to a ridiculous degree. A healthy gretzky would outpoint a healthy orr by 50-60 points. Doug Harvey was the better defensive d-man. How on earth would 5 orr's beat 3 gretzky's and 2 harveys. They would get outscored and outdefended.

There is also no proof that if Gretzky and Orr played against each other in the playoffs that orr could actually stop him. The edmonton oilers gretzky is the most dominant playoff performer ever, not orr.

 

[Rhiessan71]

I like bobby orr, but this website overglorifies him to a ridiculous degree.

W/e dude, according to you maybe.

Once again it's funny, people who saw/coached/played with Orr pick Orr and people who didn't say he's over-glorified.

The reality is that even though Gretzky put up monster numbers and set all those records, a large group of people think Orr in his short career was just as impressive as Gretzky and revolutionized the game more than any other player in the history of the game.

I'm not going to sit here and put someone down for picking Gretzky. I wouldn't even knock someone for picking Howe or Lemieux for that matter.
My choice is Orr though and that's that. No amount of bullying, whining or attempted put downs of Orr is going to change my mind or the minds of anyone else that actually saw him.


You can say Orr is over-glorified, just like I could say you're a moron.
Doesn't make either of us right or either statement true.

(I'm not calling you a moron btw, just saying that I could and it would mean just as much as you calling Orr over-glorified.)

 

[canucks4ever]

W/e dude, according to you maybe.

Once again it's funny, people who saw/coached/played with Orr pick Orr and people who didn't say he's over-glorified.

The reality is that even though Gretzky put up monster numbers and set all those records, a large group of people think Orr in his short career was just as impressive as Gretzky and revolutionized the game more than any other player in the history of the game.

I'm not going to sit here and put someone down for picking Gretzky. I wouldn't even knock someone for picking Howe or Lemieux for that matter.
My choice is Orr though and that's that. No amount of bullying, whining or attempted put downs of Orr is going to change my mind or the minds of anyone else that actually saw him.


You can say Orr is over-glorified, just like I could say you're a moron.
Doesn't make either of us right or either statement true.

(I'm not calling you a moron btw, just saying that I could and it would mean just as much as you calling Orr over-glorified.)

No, i'm saying this website overglorifies him, learn how to read. The records he set have been broken by others or nearly matched, wayne gretzky on the other hand is not a mortal.

Bobby Orr isn't the only elite two way player. Gordie Howe and Bobby Clarke were excellent two way players. Only difference, howe has more mvps, more cups, 3x the durability and he's way more physical than orr ever was. However, this website loves to be cheerleaders for the 'what ifs' like lemieux and orr, but ignore the actual accomplishments of howe and gretzky.

This website loves to talk about how orr is better than gretzky because he was physical and willing to fight. Gordie Howe would run bobby orr over like he was nothing.

The real debate for #1 is between gretzky and howe because it doesnt involve "if he could have done that" or "had he played this long". No, their debate would be simply based on thier resume, which easily eclipses that of Orr.

By the way, I have dvd's of the boston bruins playoff games from 1970 and 1974 and I have a few of his regular season games against vancouver, I beleive in 1973. So, I have sat down and evaluated his performances. His main glory is his skating, and playmaking. He was good defensively, but dont make it sound like he's the best defensive defensemen ever, because he's not. Rod Langway, Doug Harvey and Nick Lidstrom are all superior to him defensively and if you disagree, then your just a biased homeboy poster.

 

[bleeney]

Both sides are taking sides against either player, and most important is the players who played with or against both, and the fans who got to watch both almost unanimously picked Orr.

The point is the Orr fans have many excellent reasons to pick Orr and the Gretzky fans have essentially scoring titles and records on the offensive side, where Orr is very close in scoring being the 4th leading scorer of all time in points per game and playing defense first. As a center, and the was a center, he would have outclassed any era in any league. He would have challenged Gretzky's records and still play a complete hockey game from forechecking to backchecking.

Gretzky was an unbelievable player. Truly unbelievable. I can understand why those who are too young to have seen Orr play find it impossible to believe that he could've been better than Wayne. But as one who is fortunate enough to have seen both of their careers from beginning to end, my opinion of Gretzky was always "he's unreal, but as great as he is, he's no Orr". That was actually quite a common sentiment amongst those of us who saw them both play.

Darryl Sittler:

Of all the hockey players I played against, including Wayne Gretzky and Gordie Howe, Bobby Orr sticks out in my mind more than anyone else. No one dominated on the ice the way he did. His sheer control of the game was amazing and, at the same time, he was the most exciting player of our generation.

That's no slander against Guy Lafleur or anybody else-they were all great players. but for the short period of time between 1968 and 1974 before his knees gave in, Bobby Orr was the best I've seen...

It was almost as if God had said: "I'm going to make the perfect hockey player" and then had to build a wee structural weakness in the knees just to make him human.
-from Sittler; pg 80-81

That, in a nutshell, sums up what so many of us feel.