Like this place is somewhere special when they let the likes of you and Trottier hang around. It's no wonder those other guys started the other forum.
The Best PLayer In The History of The NHL
- Thread starter theprogoalie777
- Start date
Like this place is somewhere special when they let the likes of you and Trottier hang around. It's no wonder those other guys started the other forum.
EventHorizon
Bring Back Ties!
What so many people under-estimate, or fail to consider at all, is the value of the mental side of the game. All I ever hear is "the older players wouldn't succeed, or dominate, because they wouldn't have modern training techniques, and they'd be too slow, small and weak."
But it's the mental side of the game that truly determines greatness. It's your ability to think and to see the game. It's anticipation. Character. Leadership. A winning mentality. A big-game mentality. Work ethic. This is what separates the greats from the rest.
You mentioned Brind'Amour and Chelios. Good examples. But it extends far beyond conditioning. Chelios is one of the top 10 defencemen ever. He's still as tough as nails, and he's still one of the smartest defencemen in the game. He has anticipation that no coach could ever teach.
Brind'Amour's been a conditioning freak since his days at Notre Dame. But he's always been one of the smartest, most respected two-way forwards in the league. He's a good leader, who had a reputation as a big-game player long before he captained Carolina to the Stanley Cup.
If success was predicated strictly on size, speed and skill, guys like Robert Dome, Alexander Volchkov and Jason Bonsignore would be stars in the NHL. But instead, they're washouts.
All-time greats, from Cyclone Taylor and Newsy Lalonde to Joe Sakic and Jaromir Jagr, would dominate any era.
mcphee
Registered User
Geez, vaseline references, anybody who disagrees is an idiot on an arbitrary subject ?
Some Mom's just aren't doing their jobs.
Back to the greatest player ever. Here's how I qualify era to era. In my mind, as feeble as it may be, every player has to be judged relative to the era they played in. If a player consistently doubled the field in points, it has to say something when compared to another offensive player who won by 10%. Of course Howie Morenz wasn't as big or probably as fast as Ovechkin. Humans evolve but for the sake of arguemnet I use relevancy, because assuming Jan Bullis was better than Steve Shuut seems stupid to me.
If we are talking Orr/Gretzky, I take Gretz in terms of overall accomplishment. #'s don't lie. Orr played a position that didn't measure value by point totals though. if you took Orr's 3 healthiest years and compared the effect he had on the game to anyone else, there was no one who could surpass him imo. He was simply the best. No one took games over like he did. I saw him as a rookie and I saw him wind down in the 76 Canada Cup. He could impose himself on the game in any way he wanted to. He would also judge his team's needs. He wasn't going end to end in the 3rd period of a 7-2 game.
I'm not getting into the Gretzky ran up the score garbage, but the Oilers calling card was their swashbuckling style. They send the mesage that they just scored 7 and next time out they might put 10 in, just because they could.
If Orr was born a few years later,who knows. Anyways, it's not absolute,but I think Orr was the best I ever saw. Best point producer,best 2 way player,best d man,best goalie,best defensive forward, all different categories. I still think Orr was the best player.
Some Mom's just aren't doing their jobs.
Back to the greatest player ever. Here's how I qualify era to era. In my mind, as feeble as it may be, every player has to be judged relative to the era they played in. If a player consistently doubled the field in points, it has to say something when compared to another offensive player who won by 10%. Of course Howie Morenz wasn't as big or probably as fast as Ovechkin. Humans evolve but for the sake of arguemnet I use relevancy, because assuming Jan Bullis was better than Steve Shuut seems stupid to me.
If we are talking Orr/Gretzky, I take Gretz in terms of overall accomplishment. #'s don't lie. Orr played a position that didn't measure value by point totals though. if you took Orr's 3 healthiest years and compared the effect he had on the game to anyone else, there was no one who could surpass him imo. He was simply the best. No one took games over like he did. I saw him as a rookie and I saw him wind down in the 76 Canada Cup. He could impose himself on the game in any way he wanted to. He would also judge his team's needs. He wasn't going end to end in the 3rd period of a 7-2 game.
I'm not getting into the Gretzky ran up the score garbage, but the Oilers calling card was their swashbuckling style. They send the mesage that they just scored 7 and next time out they might put 10 in, just because they could.
If Orr was born a few years later,who knows. Anyways, it's not absolute,but I think Orr was the best I ever saw. Best point producer,best 2 way player,best d man,best goalie,best defensive forward, all different categories. I still think Orr was the best player.
if each player being discussed played the same amount of games, remained healthy their entire career, i am sure mario lemieux would be the greatest of all time. but sadly due to injuries and cancer he will never surpass #2 or #3. most talented player, ever.
Talent Analyst
Registered User
Forward - Gretzky
Defense - Orr
Goalie - Patrik Roy
BUT
the next will be
Forward - Ovechkin
Defense - Phenuef/Pitkanen
Goalie - Nittymaki? or if you wanna count sooner, Martin Brouduer, he's about to blow Roys records out of the water...in 3 years i believe he'll have more wins? and all that jazz
Defense - Orr
Goalie - Patrik Roy
BUT
the next will be
Forward - Ovechkin
Defense - Phenuef/Pitkanen
Goalie - Nittymaki? or if you wanna count sooner, Martin Brouduer, he's about to blow Roys records out of the water...in 3 years i believe he'll have more wins? and all that jazz
bfire
Registered User
Why not?
You make it sound like any offensive defenceman would be better than any offensive forward (Because they play offence and defence!!1!).
Who's to say Orr would be any good as a winger? Who's to say Gretzky couldn't use his famous hockey smarts and vision to become an exceptional positional defenceman in the mold of Nick Lidstrom?
This whole teams of 5-on-5 rating system is just absurd. If you put 5 Alexander Mogilny's against 5 Phil Esposito's, poor Phil would probably never touch the puck. But he was clearly the better player of the two.
I never saw Orr play, so I won't comment. But there's got to be a better way to rate players than in some sort of imaginary video-game situation...
The team of Espo's would soundly defeat a team of Mogilny's. The will to win would take over. Mogilny might have the speed advantage, and maybe an overall skill advantage. But skill is far from the only factor that wins hockey games.
Shareefruck
Registered User
It's not just because Orr's an offensive defensemen. It's that he's an offensive defensemen who was as good offensively as the best offensive forwards and as good defensively as the best defensive defensemen. And while you're one of the more physical players and a faster skater than anyone else ever to play the game.
Orr dominated his position in every way that you possibly could. Can't say the same about Gretzky, as he was never even good defensively, and was never physical at all.
No disrespect to Gretzky, but even HE wasn't perfect. Orr was as close to that as they come.
Sens Rule
Registered User
- Sep 22, 2005
- 21,251
- 74
Gretzky was good defensively, at least in the playoffs. He is underated in that way. Watch the Oilers Cup runs and tell me he isn't playing defence. Gretzky is all about winning hockey games.
pappyline
Registered User
GBC. Gotta disagree with you on this one. A team of Mogilny's would kill a team of Esposito's. Phil is one of the most over rated players ever and really needed good team mates to excel. He was very lucky to have Hull & Orr as linemates. He fed off skilled players. I give him credit for being an over achiever and getting the most out of his limited talent. He was a bad skater with good hands who needed skilled team mates to be effective.
tape-2-tape
Registered User
Obviousley you did not witness much footage of Orr playing because if you did, you'd know how great he was in all phazes of the game. I was lucky enough to have seen both Gretzky and Orr in thier primes so I'd say I should be able to establish my opinion by this fact. All that is being indicated by saying that Orr was the greatest in the history was that he simply was. He could play D, O, PP, PK, ect...ect. Wayne is one of the greatest ever but Orr could do it all, in likely any era.
Bring Back Bucky
Registered User
Bring Back Bucky
Registered User
The kind of "greatest" list that has Gretzky the 12th best player in the past 35 years is the kind of list I would expect to be put together by someone who refers to themselves in the third person. Well-done.
Is there a Doctor in the house? Great point, Doctor No
I don't know. I never saw Phil play as I was born in 76 but watching some old games he was dominate. 72 Summit series, last couple of games, plug in the old VCR and Phil was the best player on Team Canada. He had the puck the whole game (puck also seems to follow the best players), was their leader, and best player.
tape-2-tape
Registered User
I think we know your opinion quite well. You don't have to keep on posting it.
Why thank you for your comment as I believe I was answering someone who quoted me...is that o.k. with you?
