Orr Vs Gretzky

[quasi1981]

But then compare Gretzky's primary responsibility (offense) to, well, anything any other player has done in hockey.

Orr might blow Gretzky away defensively. But Gretzky absolutely blows Orr away offensively, and yes, I know Orr was an amazing offensive player.

There is no way that Gretzky is equally as much better than Orr offensively as Orr was better defensively. One more very ignorant statement with nothing to back it up. Bobby was a great offensive player all over the ice, playing both ways with a huge passion, always a threat to score anytime and anywhere the puck is on his stick. Scoring more point does not make someone a better player.

Tiny archibald won scoring titles and assist titles, and won both in the same year. He played for the Celtics with Bird in the earlier 80s and had avg stats there, and years later he said he was an infinitely better offensively better player with the Celtics. it is the whole game that wins not just scoring and stats and awards. who cares. Orr was great just by being on the ice, and everywhere he was, he was never out of his league, and everyone knew it, with or with out the puck he was the best and I can share a thousand little and large things about it, and all I get from Wayne's fans are stats, awards and the like.

It is really sad that stats are what you seem to think wins. They don't.

 

[canucks4ever]

On what basis is Orr close to Gretzky offensively?

Well he's not as good in raw numbers, but he did win an art ross by 20% in 1970. Scoring 120 points when mikita only got 86 and hull only got 67 impresses the hell out of me.

 

[quasi1981]

Orr's Art Ross trophies are a remarkable accomplishment for a defenseman but to even try to say he was close to Gretzky offensively is not true. Orr didn't not win them in a dominant fashion like Wayne did.. and Wayne won 10 times.

No one has even come close to Gretzky's peak offensively except for one season by Lemieux.

Coffey erased Orr's goal record and had a season 1 point less than Orrs best. (I know, era, blah blah)

Leetch, Mac, Potvin have also got within hailing distance of Orr offensively.

Gretzky is wayyy out there in front.

Now whether he is far enough in front on offense to make up for his average to above average defensive play vs. Orr who knows.. but Gretzky is definitely the greatest offensive force the league has seen by a long shot.

Breaking all of Orr's scoring records does absolutely nothing to tarnish Orr's offense. Scoring has nothing to do with being a great offensive player. There are so many things that make someone great, and scoring is one part of it. But only a part of it.

 

[quasi1981]

If you want to ignore the stats and look at who won what.. Gretzky wins that without breaking a sweat.

What did he win? 2 more titles in 20 years. I don't care about MVPS or any of that. Many people believe that Messier was the better player, won more championships, and played a much better all around game. It wasn't all Wayne Gretzky, and it takes a team to win, and no matter how great a passer he was, someone has to score the goal, or set up screens in front and so much other stuff in order to win.

 

[quasi1981]

Now that is really really stretching things now!!

Stretching is right, you can see they have nothing but stats to back their argument and maybe too much ESPN.

 

[quasi1981]

Ummm you do realise I'm one of the biggest Orr supporters in this thread so I'm just a tad confused over being quoted and then pounced on for the opposite.





Wow!
One way or the other, that's the biggest joke site I have seen in years.

sorry i didn't realize this, and I am so sick of this getting to be all about stats.

 

[quasi1981]

Avoiding being hit is not the same as avoiding all physical contact.

Generally, avoiding ALL physical contact is universally considered a knock against a player, not a positive....except in this thread of course, where Gretzky gets bonus points for it and Orr get penalized for it....you'll excuse me if I step back and snicker for a minute or two ;
)

Once more we see that none of you saw Orr, and the ones who watched both play picked Orr, big time!

But that means nothing, right? gretzky HAS to be better than Orr, right?

 

[PlagerBros*]

Any thoughts on the fact that the way Orr played was pretty revolutionary and teams had no idea how to deal with it?

 

[quasi1981]

Actually, Sittler's career (70-71 to 84-85) overlapped the Orr and Gretzky eras.

Orr's career was effectively over after 1975 (he played only 36 games over the last 4 years before he retired). So Sittler had five years in the league against Orr (71-75), playing the Bruins six times a year.

Gretzky came into the league in 79-80. Sittler played until '85, giving him six years in the league during Gretzky's time. He played the Oilers four times a year as a Leaf, three times as a Flyer and Red Wing.

He faced Orr a few more times than he faced Gretzky, but he certainly played against each of them enough to make a sound judgement. And he felt that, as great a player as Gretzky was, Orr was better. Among those whose careers spanned Orr's and Gretzky's, those who think Gretzky was the better player are few and far between. Funny, but the same isn't true re those whose careers spanned Howe's and Orr's. There is a long list of players who felt Orr was the better player (including none other than Bobby Hull, who called Orr "my idol")

btw, I heard Dale Hawerchuk being interviewed on the Bill Watters show. This is a guy who went head to head against Gretzky for years, during Wayne's prime, including several playoff rounds. When he was asked who the greatest player ever was, he didn't hesitate to say "Orr".

Bobby Schmautz played with both during his prime and supposedly laughed out loud at the comparison, picking Orr without question.

It is rather funny how this whole thing is turning.

 

[quasi1981]

I know, I read those. and still think you used it wrongly. I think it is at least arguable who had the better offensive peak. and that Gretzky won both those is in large part due to a much more accomplished career. in my eyes more so than people arguing he was " a lot better than Orr offensively".

Orr's offensive play was all over the place like getting the puck behind his goal on a 5 on 3 against, and ride the 3 guys chasing him all over the ice, taking it into their zone and turning around at times and going all the way back and doing the whole thing again. it may be defense, but it was his offensive play flying around the rink tiring out 3 players by himself.

Now that is great offense, wherever it is needed, and Wayne couldn't do anything like that.

 

[quasi1981]

On what basis is Orr close to Gretzky offensively?

Orr played great impeckable offense deep in his own end, killing 5 on 3 against by riding the puck up the ice avoiding all three players chasing him down and going into their end as if to score, and sometimes did, but against 5 on 3 he chose to go back to his end and let his offensive abilities skating off both penalties, by himself until it was time and then he would start a break pass up ice.

great offensive play anywhere, and it isn't all about scoring.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Any thoughts on the fact that the way Orr played was pretty revolutionary and teams had no idea how to deal with it?

By 1974, the Flyers did figure out how to deal with it - dump the puck into Orr's corner on purpose and pressure him and hit him before he got a chance to get going.

On the other hand, I don't think anyone figured out a way to deal with prime Gretzky in the playoffs.

For me, this is a huge point in Gretzky's favor.

On the other hand, Orr did change the way the game was played more than Gretzky, revolutionizing the way defensemen could play, leading to the great generation of offensive defensemen in the 1980s. This is a huge point in Orr's favor.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

100% agreement with you, it is obvious most Gretzky fans no little about the game, they don't understand it at all in general. All they have is stats, and stats don't win championships. They are for losers. Orr played offense all the time even deep in his own end, the way he carried the puck out of his own end, and all the other teams forwards would hustle back in a panic as this defenseman came out so fast and graceful, taking the puck from end to end. A great player always plays offense and defense, back checking, forechecking and so many other things. It was never about how many points Orr scored, but how he played the game, perfectly! He was always around the puck, and more so the action, it was being around the play so he could make the best offensive or defensive play, and mostly it was both at the same instance, taking the puck off your stick and start a rush or passing to a mate a getting something started which mostly was try to get the puck back off to Orr as fast as they could.

No, stats don't win championships, but Gretzky does. Twice as many as Orr, if we count the NHL only. If we count the Canada Cups (where Gretzky was always captain and best player), then more than twice as many.

 

[canucks4ever]

By 1974, the Flyers did figure out how to deal with it - dump the puck into Orr's corner on purpose and pressure him and hit him before he got a chance to get going.

On the other hand, I don't think anyone figured out a way to deal with prime Gretzky in the playoffs.

For me, this is a huge point in Gretzky's favor.

On the other hand, Orr did change the way the game was played more than Gretzky, revolutionizing the way defensemen could play, leading to the great generation of offensive defensemen in the 1980s. This is a huge point in Orr's favor.

Another point is that Gretzky played against gainey's canadians in the early 80's and the flyers of the mid 80s, two excellent defensive teams and they couldn't stop gretzky from scoring. So there really is nothing that suggests orr would dominate gretzky head to head in the playoffs.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

There is no way that Gretzky is equally as much better than Orr offensively as Orr was better defensively. One more very ignorant statement with nothing to back it up. Bobby was a great offensive player all over the ice, playing both ways with a huge passion, always a threat to score anytime and anywhere the puck is on his stick. Scoring more point does not make someone a better player.

Before you start lecturing others on their "ignorance," you might want to work on your reading comprehension. I did not say anything about the difference in offense offsetting the difference in defense (though it very well could). I simply said Gretzky was much more productive offensively than even Orr, which he was.

These are both gods among men in the hockey world and I really wish you could tone down your Orr fanboyism enough to see that.

It is really sad that stats are what you seem to think wins. They don't.

No, great plays by great players like Gretzky win. As in 4 Cups in 5 years and multiple Canada Cups. Not to mention dragging an incredibly mediocre LA Kings team to the finals on his back.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

What did he win? 2 more titles in 20 years. I don't care about MVPS or any of that. Many people believe that Messier was the better player, won more championships, and played a much better all around game. It wasn't all Wayne Gretzky, and it takes a team to win, and no matter how great a passer he was, someone has to score the goal, or set up screens in front and so much other stuff in order to win.

Please find one person, let alone "many," who believes Messier was a better player than Gretzky. Please find this person and bring him here, so we can all point and laugh.

 

[quasi1981]

Any thoughts on the fact that the way Orr played was pretty revolutionary and teams had no idea how to deal with it?

That is the one constant for sure, and that is that Gretzky did not revolutionize the game.

Bobby Orr did revolutionize the game, changing it forever!!

 

[canucks4ever]

That is the one constant for sure, and that is that Gretzky did not revolutionize the game.

Bobby Orr did revolutionize the game, changing it forever!!

Wayne Gretzky is the reason Hockey exists in the southwest and why it has gained more fame in america, he is a far bigger ambassador than Orr.

You keep saying orr changed the game, um yeah since 1998 defensemen went back to being stay at home and only going up to join the rush when absolutely necessary. The offensive defensemen era ended like 15 years ago. From 1995-2010, not a single defensemen has scored over 85 points, so yeah the run n gun days are over.

Another thing, you need to stop giving all credit to bobby orr. Eddie Shore was the one who brought physicality and offense into defensemen. Doug Harvey was the one who would rush the puck up the ice and play excellent defense. Not everyone emulates thier game to be bobby orr.

Scott Stevens and Denis Potvin pretty much played like Eddie Shore. Rod Langway played Doug Harvey's style and Nick Lidstrom is pretty much the modern doug harvey, except he's less physical. Not every defensemen tries to be bobby orr. The days of Paul Coffey, Brian Leetch and other Orr wannabes ended a long time ago.

 

[Fourier]

100% agreement with you, it is obvious most Gretzky fans no little about the game, they don't understand it at all in general. All they have is stats, and stats don't win championships. They are for losers. Orr played offense all the time even deep in his own end, the way he carried the puck out of his own end, and all the other teams forwards would hustle back in a panic as this defenseman came out so fast and graceful, taking the puck from end to end. A great player always plays offense and defense, back checking, forechecking and so many other things. It was never about how many points Orr scored, but how he played the game, perfectly! He was always around the puck, and more so the action, it was being around the play so he could make the best offensive or defensive play, and mostly it was both at the same instance, taking the puck off your stick and start a rush or passing to a mate a getting something started which mostly was try to get the puck back off to Orr as fast as they could.

I am most definitely going to regret writing this, but what the heck...

You make outlandish claims like anyone that was a fan of Gretzky's knows nothing about hockey...followed by gems like the bolded note above, while seeming to be blissfully ignorant of the irony of a claim that is intended to imply that Orr's game leads to championships, while Gretzky's does not.

You then go on to say things like "Bobby Schmautz played in his prime with both Orr and Greztky", again demonstrating that you either know nothing of what you speak or that perhaps you are simply trying to spam the thread with misinformation. (And just to prempt any such responses, I actually watched Schmautz in an Oiler jersey.)

In the end, your posts do nothing to advance Orr's case. In fact exactly the opposite. While others on here make rather eloquent arguments for Orr's virtuoso-like talents, something that I do not dispute by the way, your rambling comments at best make very little sense, and at worst are near laughable in how far away they are from anything resembling the truth.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I am most definitely going to regret writing this, but what the heck...

You make outlandish claims like anyone that was a fan of Gretzky's knows nothing about hockey...followed by gems like the bolded note above, while seeming to be blissfully ignorant of the irony of a claim that is intended to imply that Orr's game leads to championships, while Gretzky's does not.

You then go on to say things like "Bobby Schmautz played in his prime with both Orr and Greztky", again demonstrating that you either know nothing of what you speak or that perhaps you are simply trying to spam the thread with misinformation. (And just to prempt any such responses, I actually watched Schmautz in an Oiler jersey.)

In the end, your posts do nothing to advance Orr's case. In fact exactly the opposite. While others on here make rather eloquent arguments for Orr's virtuoso-like talents, something that I do not dispute by the way, your rambling comments at best make very little sense, and at worst are near laughable in how far away they are from anything resembling the truth.

What, you don't think those 29 games an injury-plagued 34 year old Schmautz played with Gretzky in Gretzky's rookie year counts as his prime?

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Am I the only one that would enjoy a cage fight between quasi1981 and the guy who made NoMoreOrr.com?

 

[Pie O My]

oh man, talk about the never ending debate. i said it before in another Orr/Gretzky thread (or 2) so why not say it in this one -

Gretzky was primarily Einstein, but he could be Tchaikovsky when he wanted to.

Orr was primarily Mozart, but he could be Tesla when he wanted to.

any hockey fan would be honored and consider themselves blessed to have had either one on their fav team.

Me? I'm an Orr guy. but that doesn't stop me from looking at Gretz's career stats and start drooling.

that nomoreorr website is fanfriggintastic!

 

[Up the Irons]

this argument that 'Orr was better because he was a defensemen and therefore better over the whole ice surface' doesn't hold water. Then let's just say offensive defensemen are the best players in the game. That's like saying Joe Montana is better than Jerry Rice. Sorry, not a chance. As a quarterback, Montana had more impact on a game, but was not a better player than Rice.

I've said before, no one achieved more in their job than Gretzky did in his. There were some who were better all round talents, some with more dazzling individual talents, but Wayner is the most successful, impactful, and important player to every lace 'em up.

 

[Up the Irons]

'Gretzky was primarily Einstein, but he could be Tchaikovsky when he wanted to.

Orr was primarily Mozart, but he could be Tesla when he wanted to.'

I like that one. Especially putting Tesla up there with Einstein.

 

[Pie O My]

'Gretzky was primarily Einstein, but he could be Tchaikovsky when he wanted to.

Orr was primarily Mozart, but he could be Tesla when he wanted to.'

I like that one. Especially putting Tesla up there with Einstein.

i was actually comparing Tesla's impact on science on par with T-kovsky's impact on music, while holding Mozart and Einstien as the gold standard for their respective specialties. i'm not an expert on either scientific or music history but the point i was trying to make was that both Orr and Gretzky were excellent even in the role that they were not primarily known for.

I'm an Orr lover without being a Gretzky hater.