Top-100 Hockey Players of All-Time - Round 2, Vote 6

[Dennis Bonvie]

It was probably Esposito.

Had him first, then again last.

 

[DitchMarner]

So... ummm.. the thing about Esposito's production in BOS having been 20% or so lower without Orr is true after all?

Just need to know because it's bothering me now if it is or isn't... lol.

 

[seventieslord]

So... ummm.. the thing about Esposito's production in BOS having been 20% or so lower without Orr is true after all?

Just need to know because it's bothering me now if it is or isn't... lol.

It sure looks like it is.

The only way to conclude it isn't, would be to completely disregard seasons Orr was healthy, but why would we throw out data?

 

[Canadiens1958]

How was Esposito defensively without Orr in Boston?

One thing to compare offensive results, another defensive results.

 

[seventieslord]

How was Esposito defensively without Orr in Boston?

One thing to compare offensive results, another defensive results.

To answer that accurately, we need to have a very good approximation of how often they were together and apart at even strength. How often they collaborated on points with eachother would be a helpful starting point.

Short answer: Esposito allowed a lot more goals without Orr than with, but so did everyone else.

 

[Canadiens1958]

To answer that accurately, we need to have a very good approximation of how often they were together and apart at even strength. How often they collaborated on points with eachother would be a helpful starting point.

Short answer: Esposito allowed a lot more goals without Orr than with, but so did everyone else.

Actually, first five Boston seasons, Esposito's TGA was very stable, 69,69,69,72,67:

Phil Esposito Stats | Hockey-Reference.com

while Orr's GP varied from 46 to 78.

 

[seventieslord]

Actually, first five Boston seasons, Esposito's TGA was very stable, 69,69,69,72,67:

Phil Esposito Stats | Hockey-Reference.com

while Orr's GP varied from 46 to 78.

Orr's GP varied, Esposito's did not. Orr of course killed a lot more penalties than Esposito.

On a per-unit of ice time basis, or per goal for basis, Orr was definitely getting scored on a lot less.

 

[Staniowski]

He played one game in Boston without him

Incorrect.

Orr played 5 games without Esposito when they were teammates, 2 regular season games, 3 in the playoffs.

Boston was outscored 28 - 12 over the 5 games, losing 4 of them. All games were against teams that finished below the Bruins in the standings in the respective seasons.

Orr went scoreless in 4 of the 5 games (he had 2 points in the other), had a +/- of -6 overall in the 5 games (never had a + in any of the games).

 

[Staniowski]

So... ummm.. the thing about Esposito's production in BOS having been 20% or so lower without Orr is true after all?

Just need to know because it's bothering me now if it is or isn't... lol.

No, it's not true @GlitchMarner. And BTW, apparently they are up to 30% now.

Esposito scored at about the same rate with or without Orr when they were teammates.

And for the majority of the time without Orr, Esposito scored at a higher rate. All you have to do is look at the data, you can see for yourself.

 

[Staniowski]

	GP with	Pts With	GP w/o	Pts w/o
1968	51.0	57.0	31.0	35.0
1969	71.2	110.1	8.6	14.9
1970	82.0	101.0	0.0	0.0
1971	82.0	141.0	0.0	0.0
1972	79.9	133.0	0.0	0.0
1973	66.2	101.5	15.8	19.6
1974	77.8	133.2	4.3	4.8
1975	81.0	110.0	0.0	0.0
1976	0.0	0.0	12.3	13.9
Total	591.1	886.8	72.0	88.1
68/76 PPG	with Orr:	1.500	W/O Orr:	1.222

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

1.500/1.222 = 1.23. On an adjusted basis, Esposito scored 23% more with Orr than without.

All figures are based on adjusted numbers from hockey-reference. All numbers normalized to an 82-game schedule.

Esposito and Orr missed three games at the same time: once in 68-69, the last game of an extended injury for Orr, and once in 71-72, when they sat out the last two games of the season together. Esposito also missed one game in 74-75, while Orr played the whole season - it is, from what I can tell, the only time Orr played a game without Esposito in the lineup.

Your work here is extremely shoddy.

You're wrong, and you're wrong by a lot.

 

[Staniowski]

Incorrect.

Orr played 5 games without Esposito when they were teammates, 2 regular season games, 3 in the playoffs.

Boston was outscored 28 - 12 over the 5 games, losing 4 of them. All games were against teams that finished below the Bruins in the standings in the respective seasons.

Orr went scoreless in 4 of the 5 games (he had 2 points in the other), had a +/- of -6 overall in the 5 games (never had a + in any of the games).

It's interesting that Orr got zero points in 4 of the 5 games he played without Esposito when they were teammates. I mean, if you were to randomly pick any 5 games from Orr's career (keeping in mind that none of these 5 games occurred prior to '69, when Orr's scoring was lower), how many times (of picking 5 games) would it take to find 4 games where Orr was scoreless? I don't have the answer but I would guess you would need to do it at least thousands of times.

So, is it a coincidence that Orr was scoreless in 4 of the 5 games he played without Esposito?

Well, I don't know, but in my opinion 5 games is too few to make any judgement.

----------

We now know that the hypothesis that Esposito's scoring declined without Orr, has failed. The evidence clearly shows that it didn't.

Moving on, my own hypothesis is that Orr's scoring numbers were more affected by Esposito than Esposito's were by Orr. In other words, Orr's numbers would've been somewhat less if Esposito wasn't his teammate.

(This is obviously not to suggest that Esposito was a better hockey player than Orr).

On one hand, we have Bobby Orr, the greatest hockey player of all-time (this is my opinion), great at everything, controlling the play like nobody else ever has, etc. But on the other hand we have Phil Esposito, who was a much more prolific scorer than Orr was. Esposito outscored Orr in 6 of their 8 seasons together, often by very significant amounts.

I get the arguments for why people think Orr was the bigger influencer on the other's scoring numbers, but I don't think they hold water. And again, the evidence shows that Esposito was a huge scorer with or without Orr.

Esposito was simply a better scorer than Orr was.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Define precisely with and without Orr? Question posed to both sides of the debate.

 

[seventieslord]

We now know that the hypothesis that Esposito's scoring declined without Orr, has failed. The evidence clearly shows that it didn't.

Whoa, hold on there, cowboy... "We" don't actually know that. You claim to know this, and you don't get to claim that "evidence clearly shows" something when all you've done is say that the existing work is shoddy and "wrong by a lot". Show us where you're getting this from.

I have gone through all my spreadsheets and unfortunately cannot find the one where I did all this work. Most likely it was never saved, as I saw no reason to do so once I posted the results. I wish I did save it, because it was highly detailed, including the date, opponent and the defensive record of the opponent (I thought there was a chance, with Orr missing some, but not many games, that the strength of schedule while he was out could differ from normal, but it turned out that was not the case, so it needed not be presented that way). Knowing now that opponent strength was a non-factor, it would probably take about an hour to gather this data again. Can you help me determine if that is necessary?

The way I obtained these results was by comparing the game logs for Orr and Esposito right on nhl.com. I simply determined which games Orr missed and how many points Esposito had in those games. I summed Epsosito's with/without GP and points, and then adjusted using HR's adjustment formula - Typically, analyzing players over a short period of seasons does not require adjustment, because not much changes around the league in that time - but in this particular period, it was absolutely necessary - league offense rose steadily by a total of 22.7% over this time.

Despite the lack of source data, I played around with the results to try to understand where you're coming from when you say Esposito's scoring did not decline without Orr. But I can't. My conclusion was that there was a 23% rise in Esposito's scoring with Orr, compared to without. If I throw out 1970, 1971, 1972 and 1975 (for lack of "without Orr" data in those seasons) and 1976 (for lack or "with Orr" data), - even though I do not think that is a responsible use of the data we have - it actually makes the gap 24.4%. If we completely throw out 1968 (let's say because Orr wasn't the offensive dynamo he'd soon become, even if, again, I disagree with throwing that data out), the gap we are left with is 17%. I am sorry but I just can't see how you are concluding he was completely unaffected. Show us your work please. One or more of these seasons must have drastically incorrect source data for the final results to be this much off. Please share which one it is. Then I will correct it, then you can use the word "we" to represent all of us who now accept the truth that Esposito's scoring never declined without Orr.

And yes I realize ImporterExporter is saying "30%" or "close to 30%" or maybe both - yes that is absurd and it's misuse of my work and exaggeration of my conclusions. Take that up with him instead of talking like we are some sort of anti-Esposito cohort.

 

[Canadiens1958]

23 or 30% depending if viewed as a premium or discount. Roughly 23 % less requires roughly 30% more. Similar to exchange rates.

 

[seventieslord]

23 or 30% depending if viewed as a premium or discount. Roughly 23 % less requires roughly 30% more. Similar to exchange rates.

This is true and this reciprocal property is something that most people tend to neglect when discussing percentage factors.

However, in this case that works in the opposite direction. If it's true that Esposito scored 23% more with orr, then the reverse of that is saying that he scored 19% less without him. So there's really no basis for getting to 30%.