Top-100 Hockey Players of All-Time - Round 2, Vote 1

[blogofmike]

Gordie Howe had some great teams, but my gut feeling is he didn't have overwhelming support in terms of offensive production either. Lindsay, Delvecchio and Ullman were great players in their own right, but aside from Terrible Ted will fall in the latter half of this list (if at all).

Ted was a 1950 Ross winner and Kelly would have won the Hart in 54(?) if not for the Rollins vote. They led the Wings to a Cup with Howe injured.

 

[MXD]

i guess we all define these words differently for ourselves, but to me top is who performed best on the ice.

greatest is how you conducted yourself on the ice, off the ice, what you meant to the game, what you mean to fans, non-fans, society, etc.

for example, you could make an argument that doug harvey was a better player than rocket or beliveau. but you'd be hard pressed to make an argument that harvey was greater than them. ykwim?

Rocket and Beliveau were French-Canadians playing forward in Montreal and were revered as icons, albeit for different reasons, off the ice.

Doug Harvey... Well, wasn't French-Canadian, and had issues that probably prevented him from being the same kind of role model after his caeer. Also, Harvey was traded (admittedly for off-ice REASONS which can't exactly be a negative), which certainly did have an impact in their respective perception, post-career.

So, one thing he litterally didn't control, the other he barely controlled, and the other was trying to form a player union. Those aren't exactly basis on which I'd like to decide this.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

You can also argue Mario is a better playoff performer, which is what really matters.

Yes you can. His back to back smythes equaled 78 points combined a two year total second to only Gretzkys 82 points. His 44 points are also second most all time and 7 points clear of any non Gretzky player.

 

[blogofmike]

If Orr and Lemieux have similar peaks. Then Lemieux has to be well ahead in longevity. Post age 30 Lemieux was still a dominant player (second in hart voting at 35.) while Orr was retired.

Mario's 1996 and 1997 would also count as longevity boosters over Orr too, no?

 

[Canadiens1958]

But the concept of "making" another player is based on the idea of offensive production. Unless I am completely mis-understanding the label, but I don't believe I am.



I'll include this in here since it brings up the same thing as Dennis above.

Far from, playing with elite defencemen made or extended careers of fringe defencemen.

Best example would be the effect of
Doug Harvey on Al Langlois.

 

[Nick Hansen]

Far from, playing with elite defencemen made or extended careers of fringe defencemen.

Best example would be the effect of
Doug Harvey on Al Langlois.

Lidstrom and Ian White. Christ, that guy just fell of a cliff so high it is unfathomable after Lidstrom retired. 77 gms, 32 pts and +23. Looks solid but the guy was out of the league a year later and couldn't keep a job in the KHL.

 

[Nick Hansen]

Rocket and Beliveau were French-Canadians playing forward in Montreal and were revered as icons, albeit for different reasons, off the ice.

Doug Harvey... Well, wasn't French-Canadian, and had issues that probably prevented him from being the same kind of role model after his caeer. Also, Harvey was traded (admittedly for off-ice REASONS which can't exactly be a negative), which certainly did have an impact in their respective perception, post-career.

So, one thing he litterally didn't control, the other he barely controlled, and the other was trying to form a player union. Those aren't exactly basis on which I'd like to decide this.

Harvey's definitely a name for the top 100 alcoholics of the NHL.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

Mario's 1996 and 1997 would also count as longevity boosters over Orr too, no?

You are right. Orr was retired at 30.

Mario 30 and beyond
2 art ross
1 hart
1 Lindsay
2nd place hart finish
Third place hart finish
2 first team all star
2nd in ppg at 37 years old
9th in scoring at 37

Mario from age 22-30 was doing this only Gretzky ever could. No player ever came close to him. I mean Orr’s goal record was broken nobody came close to Lemieux 199 points. Who came close to 46 point streak?

Lemieux for my money was comparable at his prime peak but also added that longevity. This is usually why people put Howe above Lemieux but I’ve akways been confused why the same is not done when Lemieux is compared to Orr.

Now when it comes to Lemieux vs Howe I’ve always like to look at it like this. Howe had some dominant seasons and then all of a sudden at age 25/26 with the emergence of Beliveau, Moore etc he was getting outscored and was right there in the pack.

Lemieux was not on the same planet as any other player.
Below is a nice way to look at things.

87-88
Lemieux 168 points
Gretzky 149 points/ age 27
Savard 131 points

88-89
Lemieux 199 points
Gretzky 168 points/age 28
Yzerman 155 points
91-92
Lemieux 131 points
Stevens 123 points
Gretzky 121 points/ age 31

Very interesting that 3 out of 6 of Lemieuxs art ross trophies came while Gretzky was directly second twice and third in scoring another. Gretzky was only 27-31 at this time still young enough for this to be very prudent in the discussion with Howe.

 

[VanIslander]

... the case for Howe being in the top-2 works just as well as the case for him being #1. The simplest way to make that case is as follows:

1. Point out his extreme longevity, particularly how high he was in the scoring race and Hart voting in his Xth best season compared to other top-4 players:

In their respective 12th best seasons:

- Howe was 3rd in points and 3rd in Hart voting
- Gretzky was 2nd in points (and? but?) 4th in Hart voting
- Lemieux was a very good player but did not play enough to be a factor in Hart voting nor was he top-10 in scoring
- Orr was retired

In their respective 15th best seasons:

- Howe was 4th in scoring and 5th in Hart voting
- Gretzky won the scoring title without receiving a single Hart vote
- Lemieux played about 20 games
- Orr was retired

In their respective 18th best seasons:

- Howe was 5th in scoring and 7th in Hart voting
- Gretzky was "just" a PPG player in the 1994-95 lockout season
- Lemieux was retired
- Orr was retired

An interesting way to compare.

2. his prime is not to be discounted and is actually extremely dominant offensively:

Howe is 2nd all-time in VsX scores, whether you want to 5, 7, or 10 year samples. If you go with 10, he's about 22% behind Gretzky in that time. (if you go by their best four margins of victory in the scoring race vs. non-teammates, I get the same answer: Gretzky 22% ahead of Howe) He's not even behind Lemieux, though I'm sure if you adjust for missed games you would likely find that Lemieux was producing at a similar or better rate when he was actually playing. Gretzky outscored his nearest non-teammate by 58% n a per-game basis during his most favorable period. Howe outscored his by just 20%, but his competition was Maurice Richard, not Mike Bossy.

It's arguable that his 10-year value is "close enough" to Gretzky's, when you consider his comparative all-around play, that his seasons 11-20 bridge that gap. In those 11-20 seasons, Howe's 10-year VsX is virtually identical to that of Gretzky, yet Hart voting in those seasons seems to indicate he was seen as a considerably higher impact player than Wayne. Whether that's enough to bridge the gap depends on how wide you think that gap is. It starts at the 22% offensive edge and lessens the more you value other things.

And Howe was a force without the puck as well. The valued 'other things' could use detailing with references. I'll get to that this week. (Dang it's just Monday and this thread is chock full of intriguing reflections!)

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Because what you're describing is peak - and peak is just one component of a player's resume.

It's one thing if you say peak is by far the most important for you - and as such it's a very big part of your overall ranking. But it shouldn't be only about peak - if not we're comparing apples to oranges and it makes this whole project useless. My "all time" ranking is vastly different than my "peak" ranking.



So I don't get it it's ok to rank just off of peak? How is that fair, or how does that possibly provide results that are worthwhile?

Can I unilaterally decide i don't like playoff hockey - and only look at regular season too? There needs to be some sort of consistency here. If we're doing an all-time ranking - you need to look at everything the player accomplished - and that includes more than just that player at his very best (ie peak). Maybe you can weight certain criteria more than others - but i don't think it's fair at all to only consider how "good" a player was, vs looking at his full career.

Why?

I thought we were trying to rank the best players, not the collective numbers on a career stat sheet.

 

[Captain Bowie]

i guess we all define these words differently for ourselves, but to me top is who performed best on the ice.

greatest is how you conducted yourself on the ice, off the ice, what you meant to the game, what you mean to fans, non-fans, society, etc.

for example, you could make an argument that doug harvey was a better player than rocket or beliveau. but you'd be hard pressed to make an argument that harvey was greater than them. ykwim?

By those terms, we are strictly speaking about the "top" 100 players, as opposed to the "greatest" 100 players.

 

[Captain Bowie]

Far from, playing with elite defencemen made or extended careers of fringe defencemen.

Best example would be the effect of
Doug Harvey on Al Langlois.

How does that translate into Bobby Orr "making" Phil Esposito? Did he make him more productive defensively?

 

[Captain Bowie]

Why?

I thought we were trying to rank the best players, not the collective numbers on a career stat sheet.

Do the numbers on the stat sheet not signify something important they did? Like score goals, or be voted best at their position?

 

[ImporterExporter]

Orr vs Gretzky

1. I don't think some people fully appreciate how dominant a peak Orr was. Consider scoring based on 7 year VsX. Orr produced more points per year in 7 year peak form than Jagr, Hull, Mikita, Beliveau, etc. From the blueline! That's flat out absurd.

Then consider that the next closest player to Orr's 7 year peak offensive value among Dmen is Coffey, who btw, had the benefit of playing with Gretzky and Lemieux for a large portion of his career, was rather weak defensively and got to enjoy a scoring era that dwarfs anything else post consolidation. Orr posted insane scoring numbers, when you factor in he played D and did it while not being a liability in any way in his own end.

The gap between Orr and Coffey (the next highest Dman) is 26.7

The gap between Gretzky and Esposito (the next highest F) is 25.2

TABLE 1 - BEST SEVEN YEARS, POINTS (last updated: 2018)

Wayne Gretzky	155.6
Phil Esposito	130.4
Gordie Howe	125.5
Mario Lemieux	119.8
Bobby Orr	114.8
Jaromir Jagr	114.2
Bobby Hull	108.3
Stan Mikita	107.8
Jean Beliveau	105.7
Guy Lafleur	104.5
Ted Lindsay	104.4
Marcel Dionne	103.3
Sidney Crosby	102.4
Maurice Richard	102.4
Howie Morenz	102.2
Andy Bathgate	101.1
Alex Ovechkin	98.4
Joe Sakic	97.7
Bill Cowley	97.0
Charlie Conacher	96.2
Bill Cook	96.0
Joe Thornton	95.6
Frank Boucher	95.1
Mike Bossy	94.8
Evgeni Malkin	93.7
Bryan Trottier	93.7
Steve Yzerman	93.2
Teemu Selanne	92.7
Martin St. Louis	92.4
Syl Apps Sr	92.4
Sweeney Schriner	91.3
Bobby Clarke	90.4
Max Bentley	90.4
Peter Forsberg	90.3
Nels Stewart	90.3
Adam Oates	90.0
Bernie Geoffrion	89.9
Mark Messier	89.6
Jean Ratelle	89.6
Marty Barry	89.6
Norm Ullman	89.5
Busher Jackson	89.5
Patrick Kane	89.2
John Bucyk	88.7
Steven Stamkos	88.4
Peter Stastny	88.4
Mark Recchi	88.4
Jari Kurri	88.1
Paul Coffey	88.1

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

2. Adjusted +/-

Another nice look at how dominant Orr was when you factor adjusted +/- (another overpass special). Well, he and Bourque I should say, haha. Both are well out in front of Gretzky btw.

Look at the Even Strength goals against. It's essentially 3 times less (526) vs Wayne (1492), yet the ES goals for is not even a 2 to 1 advantage for 99.

If a person factors not allowing goals as much value as scoring them, not hard to see why having Orr makes you a more complete team right off the bat.

Glossary of Terms:

SFrac: Season Fraction. 1.00 is a full season. I prefer it to games played because it gives a 48 game season, a 74 game season, an 80 game season or an 82 game season the same weight.
$ESGF: Even-strength goals for, normalized to a 200 ESG scoring environment and with estimated SH goals removed.
$ESGA: Even-strength goals against, normalized to a 200 ESG scoring environment and with estimated SH goals removed.
R-ON: Even strength GF/GA ratio when the player is on the ice.
R-OFF: Even-strength GF/GA ratio when the player is off the ice.
XEV+/-: Expected even-strength plus-minus, which is an estimate of the plus-minus that an average player would post with the same teammates. The calculation is described above.
EV+/-: Even –strength plus-minus, which is simply plus-minus with estimated shorthanded goals removed and normalized to a 200 ESG environment.
AdjEV+/-: Adjusted even-strength plus-minus, which is even-strength plus-minus minus expected even-strength plus-minus. This is the final number.
The following three stats evaluate special teams play and are not related to adjusted plus-minus. I’m including them in the table for a quick reference to the player’s contributions outside of even-strength play.
PP% : The % of the team’s power play goals for that the player was on the ice for.
SH%: The % of the team’s power play goals against that the player was on the ice for.
$PPP/G: Power play points per game, normalized to a 70 PPG environment and with pre-1988 PP assists estimated.

Results
Here are the top 100 in career adjusted even-strength plus-minus, as well as the players in the HOH Top 100 and several others who were strongly considered for voting.

Rank	Player	GP	$ESGF	$ESGA	R-ON	R-OFF	EV%	EV+/-	XEV+/-	AEV+/-	AEV+/-/82
1	Jaromir Jagr	1711	1794	1332	1.35	0.93	40%	461	-69	530	25
2	Ray Bourque	1612	1691	1231	1.37	0.95	42%	460	-48	508	26
3	Bobby Orr	657	1044	526	1.99	1.03	49%	518	13	505	63
4	Wayne Gretzky	1487	1893	1492	1.27	1.04	47%	401	39	362	20
5	Larry Robinson	1384	1632	1022	1.60	1.34	43%	611	250	360	21
6	Nicklas Lidstrom	1564	1682	1189	1.41	1.17	41%	493	149	344	18

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

3. Special Teams.

Orr is so far and away the best power play and penalty kill player in history. First off, he essentially played all of Boston's power play and when he was on the ice Boston scored with the man advantage 46% above the league average. Even "elite" PP men like Potvin, Leetch, Bourque, MacInnis show nowhere near the impact on the power play that Orr had for Boston.

The second graph is the PK. Another metric Orr shines. So Orr essentially played half of all ES minutes for Boston, 98% of the power play and then 62% of the kill. Numbers that dwarf Gretzky btw. And on the kill Orr helped Boston produce a kill rate that was 22% above the league average. So in layman's terms, that's really f***ing good.

Players Orr was used more on the kill than: Savard, Bourque, Chelios, Horton, Stevens, Chara, etc among many other HOF'ers.

Power Play - Defencemen

Player	GP	$PPP/82	$PP%	$TmPP+
Bobby Orr	657	43	98%	1.46
Ray Bourque	1612	33	88%	1.11
Brian Leetch	1205	33	87%	1.11
Denis Potvin	1060	31	87%	1.19
Al Macinnis	1416	35	87%	1.18
Jeff Brown	747	29	84%	0.99
Phil Housley	1495	28	84%	1.01
Brad Park	1115	26	81%	1.15
Gary Suter	1145	28	80%	1.13
Paul Coffey	1409	31	78%	1.13

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Penalty Kill - Defencemen

Player	GP	SH%	TmSH+	$SHP/82
Jacques Laperriere	691	76%	0.90	2
J.C. Tremblay	796	66%	0.94	1
Marcel Pronovost	636	66%	0.96	1
Bill White	604	65%	0.88	1
Bobby Orr	657	62%	0.78	6
Francois Beauchemin	836	60%	1.08	1
Jay Bouwmeester	1071	59%	0.95	1
Serge Savard	1040	58%	0.82	2
Ray Bourque	1612	58%	0.88	2
Bill Hajt	854	57%	0.77	1
Chris Chelios	1651	57%	0.85	2
Barry Beck	615	57%	1.01	1
Tim Horton	1010	57%	0.92	2
Jim Schoenfeld	719	56%	0.77	1
Scott Stevens	1635	56%	0.88	1
Zdeno Chara	1350	56%	0.90	2

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

4. Even Strength Dominance

While there are a handful of Dmen who played as much or close to the same amount of ES minutes, none come even remotely close to Orr's production offensively while shutting the door on the opposition. Look at the even strength points per 82 games, goals for and against. Again, it's about being dominant at both ends of the ice. Nobody has done it quite like Bobby O. Certainly not Gretzky. It's why I can't understand why people have the likes of Jagr in the top 10. Hockey isn't just about gaudy numbers. I'd like to think the game is far more nuanced.

Even Strength - Defencemen

Player	GP	$ESP/82	$ESGF/82	$ESGA/82	R-ON	R-OFF	EV%
Bobby Orr	657	64	130	66	1.99	1.03	49%
Pat Stapleton	635	31	104	87	1.18	1.14	49%
Bill White	604	24	93	75	1.24	1.06	49%
Pierre Pilote	660	36	108	81	1.34	1.11	49%
Tim Horton	1010	24	97	83	1.16	1.17	48%
Jacques Laperriere	691	21	104	77	1.35	1.29	47%
Marcel Pronovost	636	21	93	91	1.02	0.98	46%
Gilles Marotte	808	23	85	99	0.86	0.87	46%
Leo Boivin	728	23	87	115	0.76	0.73	46%
Erik Karlsson	556	44	85	84	1.01	0.95	46%

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

 

[The Macho King]

I'm sorry - is someone arguing that Lemieuxs peak is equal to Orrs? Because it ain't.

 

[VanIslander]

I'm sorry - is someone arguing that Lemieuxs peak is equal to Orrs? Because it ain't.

Nobody is, I think, though someone has argued that the gap between Orr and Lemieux in the shorter term is more than made up by Mario in later years' performances.

 

[Captain Bowie]

Lemieux for my money was comparable at his prime peak but also added that longevity. This is usually why people put Howe above Lemieux but I’ve akways been confused why the same is not done when Lemieux is compared to Orr.

Now when it comes to Lemieux vs Howe I’ve always like to look at it like this. Howe had some dominant seasons and then all of a sudden at age 25/26 with the emergence of Beliveau, Moore etc he was getting outscored and was right there in the pack.

Howe "had some dominant seasons"? That is badly underplaying how good he was for most of the 50's. 4 straight Art Ross' 51-54. He outscored the field in the decade by 44%. During his 4 straight Art Ross seasons, he surpassed 80 points each time. Only one other player hit 70 points (Ted Lindsay, 71).

After age of 25 (and after his "some dominant seasons") He lead the league in scoring between 55 and 70. This range excludes only Beliveau's 3 coming of age seasons and final season, captures the rest of his career. Howe still outscored him.

 

[Captain Bowie]

Nobody is, I think, though someone has argued that the gap between Orr and Lemieux in the shorter term is more than made up by Mario in later years' performances.

@Ageless is.

"Lemieux for my money was comparable at his prime peak but also added that longevity."

 

[bobholly39]

Lemieux and Gretzky's offensive domination is out of this world good. To try and capture the offensive domination of each player's best years - I compared the PPG of top performers over each player's best consecutive years. I was initially going to do the same amount of years for each player - but instead i chose to cherry pick the best years possible for each player. 9 for Lemieux, Howe, 10 for Gretzky, 7 for Beliveau and Orr. The idea was to take each player's best years and see how much above others they were in PPG, and not necessarily to pick the exact same amount of years - so as to properly capture the level of offensive domination.

I admit I had trouble selecting which cutoff season for Howe - the other 4 were easier.

I also wasn't initially going to include Beliveau - but when I noticed how close he was to Howe I thought it would make for a good comparison.

Lemieux 1987-88 to 1995-96
Player	Games played	Goals	Assists	Points	PPG
Lemieux	530	468	678	1146	2.16
Gretzky	703	319	866	1185	1.69
Lindros	297	193	243	436	1.47
Yzerman	732	425	607	1032	1.41
Selanne	337	214	237	451	1.34
Lafontaine	571	345	410	755	1.32
Messier	702	310	606	916	1.3

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Howe 1950-51 to 1958-59
Player	Games played	Goals	Assists	Points	PPG
Howe	618	348	385	733	1.19
Beliveau	377	208	228	436	1.16
Richard	523	275	242	517	0.99
Geoffrion	475	224	230	454	0.96
Bathgate	383	138	216	354	0.92
Moore	411	154	215	369	0.9
Lindsay	601	225	306	531	0.88

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Gretzky 1980-81 to 1990-91
Player	Games played	Goals	Assists	Points	PPG
Gretzky	846	667	1338	2005	2.37
Lemieux	453	364	519	883	1.95
Bossy	524	400	417	817	1.56
Kurri	754	474	569	1043	1.38
Stastny	826	403	716	1119	1.35
Yzerman	594	342	458	800	1.35
Savard	806	379	693	1072	1.33

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Orr 1968-69 to 1974-75 - 7 years
Player	Games played	Goals	Assists	Points	PPG
Esposito	539	418	494	912	1.69
Orr	514	235	563	798	1.55
Hull	291	190	173	363	1.25
Dionne	309	139	227	366	1.18
Ratelle	516	241	344	585	1.13
Martin	294	185	143	328	1.12
Mikita	510	212	357	569	1.12

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Beliveau 1954-55 to 1960-61 - 7 years
Player	Games played	Goals	Assists	Points	PPG
Beliveau	457	255	304	559	1.22
Geoffrion	394	215	244	459	1.16
Howe	472	227	303	530	1.12
Bathgate	485	191	309	500	1.03
Moore	466	190	266	456	0.98
Maurice Richard	321	160	154	314	0.98
Henri Richard	397	140	226	366	0.92

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Here is how they stack up over the 3rd, 5th and 7th best player:

Player	Domination over 3rd place	Domination over 5th place	Domination over 7th place
Gretzky	52%	76%	78%
Lemieux	47%	61%	66%
Orr	24%	37%	50%
Howe	20%	29%	35%
Beliveau	9%	24%	33%

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Conclusion - Lemieux and Gretzky dominated their peers offensively by a LOT. Howe is significantly behind - he is closer to Beliveau territory than to Gretzky or Lemieux.
Orr's numbers for a defender - very impressive.

 

[blogofmike]

Conclusion - Lemieux and Gretzky dominated their peers offensively by a LOT. Howe is significantly behind - he is closer to Beliveau territory than to Gretzky or Lemieux.
Orr's numbers for a defender - very impressive.

The other part of that is that Top 5 is less valuable in a 6-team league. At the end of his streak, Howe was getting outscored at ES, but by dominating Detroit's PP time, he'd rise up to the Top 5, because lots of players saw limited PP time.

1964 is an example of that, where Howe was 12th in ES points, but he got so much more PP time than the field: www.nhl.com/stats/player?report=skaterpoints&reportType=season&seasonFrom=19631964&seasonTo=19631964&gameType=2&filter=gamesPlayed,gte,1&sort=evPoints

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Do the numbers on the stat sheet not signify something important they did? Like score goals, or be voted best at their position?

Sure.

But its not the whole story.

 

[ChiTownPhilly]

Why?

Top-100 Hockey Players of All-Time

Not, Top-100 Hockey Careers of All-Time

I. just. don't. have. any. idea. why...

any particular controversy should attach to the fact that our assessment of the Top-100 Hockey Players of All-Time oughtn't have as a relatively necessary consideration career-value as a component of determining who merits placing at the Very Top.

Understand correctly- not necessarily the most significant component- but something to take into account in our judgements... yes.

Now- if there are those who believe career-value is not particularly important [and I think you have to view it as nearly a non-factor in order to put Orr anywhere near level-pegging with Gretzky], then I simply have to conclude that your measuring stick is set to a markedly different scale than the one I'm using.

Now, to restate my position in précis- I'll claim that Lemieux's performance after age 26 adds enough to my developed picture of him to allow him to surpass Orr, who played little hockey of consequence after age 26. It shouldn't surprise anyone to know I feel the same way about Gordie Howe.

Okay, time to run the chronology on Orr/Lemieux:

Playing age 18- advantage Orr [Calder]. (Although The Rules prevented Lemieux from playing in the NHL at that age. Lemieux was instead obliterating the record-book in Major Junior. Still- I'll take the known-factor Orr over the speculative factor Lemieux.)

Playing age 19- advantage Lemieux [Calder]. Made someone named Warren Young a 40-goal scorer. Orr missed c. 3/8ths of the season at that age.

Playing age 20- slight advantage Lemieux. His first Pearson (Lindsay). Orr missed an eighth of the season- Lemieux played nearly every game.

Playing age 21- big edge to Orr. Orr gave us one of the historically significant seasons in NHL-history. Swept everything. Hart/Ross/Smythe/Cup. Lemieux missed 17 games in an 80 game schedule.

Playing age 22- first real "battle-of-titans" year. Duelling Hart seasons. I'll give it to Orr, with his unworldly +124, but Lemieux's Ross & goal-scoring title should get a mention here.

Playing age 23- closest thing to equal-footing. Orr got everything but the Ross trophy (Hart/Smythe/Cup), but Lemieux counters with his 199-point party-piece. Ross/goal-scoring title, and maybe 1 or 2 games away from making someone named Rob Brown a 50-goal scorer. [Common theme with Lemieux- okay (at best) players become offensive threats.]

Playing age 24- clear advantage Orr. Both players missed c. 20% of the season. Lemieux misses All-Star team consideration for the first time since he turned 20.

Playing age 25- Orr again here- Lemieux only plays 3/8ths of season- but this is that year- Lemieux returns from back surgery, goes on Epic Playoff Run- Smythe/Cup.

Playing age 26- Duelling Ross seasons. Advantage Orr- last healthy season. Some consideration due Lemieux- Smythe/Cup one more time.

So- six seasons to two in favor of Orr, with one season even. Several of these seasons are robustly contested- with some Hart, Ross, and Smythe seasons from both Gigastars. Now, however, ends the robust contention phase of the narrative. From this point forward, as I mentioned before, Lemieux will go on to score 709 more points, and Orr will manage forty-five.

Age 27- Lemieux by a light-year. Hart/Pearson (Lindsay)/Ross. Orr played ten games.
Age 28- duelling non-factor seasons.
Age 29- duelling null-sets.
Age 30- Lemieux by a Parsec. The six games Orr plays will be his last in the NHL. Lemieux: Hart/Pearson (Lindsay)/Ross/goal-scoring title.
Age 31- Lemieux's last Art Ross season. Lemieux>Orr=blank piece of paper. I seem to recall that this was also the year that Lemieux spent extensive time at LW- which I submit for the consideration of the flexibility-fiends in attendance here.
Ages 32-33-34- duelling pet rocks.
Age 35- Lemieux's last All-Star nod. again comprehensively superior to Orr's 'Echo-from-the-Void.'
Age 35-36-37-38-40- Lemieux>Orr=what Your Majesty's like.

So- to conclude, in their Peak & Prime, Orr's A+ and A++ seasons are enough to give him an edge over Lemieux's A and A+ seasons, but at the back-end, Lemieux's A & B+/B seasons add enough value over Orr's nullities to more than bridge the gap.

My calipers, my measurement, my conclusion.

 

[ted2019]

Orr vs Gretzky

1. I don't think some people fully appreciate how dominant a peak Orr was. Consider scoring based on 7 year VsX. Orr produced more points per year in 7 year peak form than Jagr, Hull, Mikita, Beliveau, etc. From the blueline! That's flat out absurd.

Then consider that the next closest player to Orr's 7 year peak offensive value among Dmen is Coffey, who btw, had the benefit of playing with Gretzky and Lemieux for a large portion of his career, was rather weak defensively and got to enjoy a scoring era that dwarfs anything else post consolidation. Orr posted insane scoring numbers, when you factor in he played D and did it while not being a liability in any way in his own end.

The gap between Orr and Coffey (the next highest Dman) is 26.7

The gap between Gretzky and Esposito (the next highest F) is 25.2





2. Adjusted +/-

Another nice look at how dominant Orr was when you factor adjusted +/- (another overpass special). Well, he and Bourque I should say, haha. Both are well out in front of Gretzky btw.

Look at the Even Strength goals against. It's essentially 3 times less (526) vs Wayne (1492), yet the ES goals for is not even a 2 to 1 advantage for 99.

If a person factors not allowing goals as much value as scoring them, not hard to see why having Orr makes you a more complete team right off the bat.








3. Special Teams.

Orr is so far and away the best power play and penalty kill player in history. First off, he essentially played all of Boston's power play and when he was on the ice Boston scored with the man advantage 46% above the league average. Even "elite" PP men like Potvin, Leetch, Bourque, MacInnis show nowhere near the impact on the power play that Orr had for Boston.

The second graph is the PK. Another metric Orr shines. So Orr essentially played half of all ES minutes for Boston, 98% of the power play and then 62% of the kill. Numbers that dwarf Gretzky btw. And on the kill Orr helped Boston produce a kill rate that was 22% above the league average. So in layman's terms, that's really ****ing good.

Players Orr was used more on the kill than: Savard, Bourque, Chelios, Horton, Stevens, Chara, etc among many other HOF'ers.










4. Even Strength Dominance

While there are a handful of Dmen who played as much or close to the same amount of ES minutes, none come even remotely close to Orr's production offensively while shutting the door on the opposition. Look at the even strength points per 82 games, goals for and against. Again, it's about being dominant at both ends of the ice. Nobody has done it quite like Bobby O. Certainly not Gretzky. It's why I can't understand why people have the likes of Jagr in the top 10. Hockey isn't just about gaudy numbers. I'd like to think the game is far more nuanced.

Can you post the table for the special teams? I had it before, but lost it sometime last year.

 

[Captain Bowie]

Sure.

But its not the whole story.

Of course not. But like I said, they represent important things that a player did on the ice. How else are you going to quantify how "good" a player was without any statistical representation?

 

[seventieslord]

Because what you're describing is peak - and peak is just one component of a player's resume.

It's one thing if you say peak is by far the most important for you - and as such it's a very big part of your overall ranking. But it shouldn't be only about peak - if not we're comparing apples to oranges and it makes this whole project useless. My "all time" ranking is vastly different than my "peak" ranking.



So I don't get it it's ok to rank just off of peak? How is that fair, or how does that possibly provide results that are worthwhile?

Can I unilaterally decide i don't like playoff hockey - and only look at regular season too? There needs to be some sort of consistency here. If we're doing an all-time ranking - you need to look at everything the player accomplished - and that includes more than just that player at his very best (ie peak). Maybe you can weight certain criteria more than others - but i don't think it's fair at all to only consider how "good" a player was, vs looking at his full career.

You can do whatever you want, as can everyone else.

Orr also got way more ice time than Gretzky did too, which is why I find it laughable when people think he could put up Wayne's offense if he was a forward. If Bobby Orr played center, he would get 25 minutes of ice time instead of 35-40 that he got with boston.

Orr did not get 35 to 40, he got 28 to 30.

(winning 4-2 is better than winning 6-4 for some reason). .

... It is. If you double your opponent's score regularly as opposed to scoring 50% more, you will win much more often.

... And why Don Awrey in particular?