Where do you rank Ray Bourque all time?

[Hockey Outsider]

Outsider, do you have a link to those player/coaches polls from any years? Thanks.

The main thread is - https://hfboards.mandatory.com/threads/player-intangibles-resource.680440/ - the summary is in the 1st post, and the details are in the following posts.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

It is entirely off-base. Gretzky lapped up all competition. In his prime only Lemieux came near once or twice. Bourque routinely lost Norrises to other (inferior) players like Langway and Wilson. Gretzky is Gretzky. Comparing Bourque to him does the former a major disservice and pretty much DEFINES "overrated."

Its not a direct comparison.

The poster called Bourque the Gretzky of Defenseman. And since Bourque is the all-time leading scorer for defensemen, it is not outrageous at all. As another poster mentioned, perhaps a better comparable would be the Gordie Howe of defensemen.

Not sure what it has to do with being considered overrated.

 

[Tuna Tatarrrrrr]

Its not a direct comparison.

The poster called Bourque the Gretzky of Defenseman. And since Bourque is the all-time leading scorer for defensemen, it is not outrageous at all. As another poster mentioned, perhaps a better comparable would be the Gordie Howe of defensemen.

Not sure what it has to do with being considered overrated.

Because he just can't accept the fact that Lidstrom will always be behind Bourque among the greatest defensemen of all time in hockey history.

 

[Sentinel]

[MOD]

Lidstrom handily beats Bourque in Norrises, Stanley Cups, Olympic golds, playoff performances, and defensive skills.

[MOD]

 

[Sentinel]

Its not a direct comparison.

The poster called Bourque the Gretzky of Defenseman. And since Bourque is the all-time leading scorer for defensemen, it is not outrageous at all. As another poster mentioned, perhaps a better comparable would be the Gordie Howe of defensemen.

Not sure what it has to do with being considered overrated.

Chelios's longevity is similar to Bourque's. Howe was also a great playoff performer. He had six Hart trophies. Bourque does not check off any of those boxes. Comparing him to Howe indeed overrates him.

 

[Tuna Tatarrrrrr]

Lidstrom handily beats Bourque in Norrises, Stanley Cups, Olympic golds, playoff performances, and defensive skills.

That Lidstrom won his Norrises in the weakest era ever for defensemen. Check

He won his Stanley Cups on the most stacked team for nearly his entire career. Check

That Bourque couldn't play in the Olympics before nearly the end of his career and past his prime. Check

That Lidstrom had a better playoffs resume on the most stacked team. Check

That Bourque was considered the best two-way defenseman ever. Check

That Bourque was a one-man army for nearly his entire career on the Bruins. Check

That Bourque won his Norrises in the strongest era for defensemen. Check

That Lidstrom will always be behind Bourque. Double check

Lidstrom will be remembered for the Fleury's save in the last seconds in game 7 of the Stanley Cup final. Or how Forsberg always undressed him.

 

[scott clam]

Chelios's longevity is similar to Bourque's. Howe was also a great playoff performer. He had six Hart trophies. Bourque does not check off any of those boxes. Comparing him to Howe indeed overrates him.

Chelios has 7 all star team selections. Bourque has 19. Cheli's longevity is impressive but after the big 01/02 season he falls off a cliff. Sticks around for about 7 years in a "veteran" role (ala Trottier or Messier) and is a healthy scratch most of his last season and playoffs. Bourque could have played longer but he went out on top. Lidstrom also could have played longer but he had already done it all.

Bourque is similar to Howe in that he was elite at his position for a ridiculously long period of time. He is also similar in that he was a guy who was extremely well rounded as a player. Powerful skater, wicked shot, incredible stamina, built like a tank, and exceptional hockey I.Q. Just an athletic freak. Gordie is obviously the greater player, some days I think he's the greatest player, but that doesn't change the fact that Bourque was a two way beast and one of the most incredibly consistent players of all time.

 

[streitz]

Always thought he was overrated.



Still a great player, but overrated.



1. Orr
2. Robinson
3. Potvin



Harvey is probably somewhere between 2-4 but never really saw any games he played.

 

[scott clam]

Also Messier frequently gets compared to Howe based on style and raw stats(and height, weight, baldness and overall appearance) but most people who make the comparison aren't insinuating that Mark is on the same tier as Gordie as an all time great. (although there is no shortage of Messier fanboys who believe that he's on a tier of his own)

 

[streitz]

Also Lidstrom is competing against arguably the darkest time in modern-league history when it comes to quality Dman.

There's him - a top 5 defender, and then....

Pronger (1 Norris, zero times runner up - I'm in a minority here but I have him as an incredibly overrated player. Maybe top 25 Dman of all-time)
Niedermayer (talk about overrated...)
Chara?
ermmm... Mike Green?
Zubov?
Weber?
Some Keith?

The level of Norris competition between the two is miles apart. And Lidstrom never had Langway's 30 points taking back-to-back Norris trophies that could have easily ended up with Bourque.

Langway was substantially better at defense then Bourque.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Chelios's longevity is similar to Bourque's. Howe was also a great playoff performer. He had six Hart trophies. Bourque does not check off any of those boxes. Comparing him to Howe indeed overrates him.

Again, not a direct comparison!

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Always thought he was overrated.



Still a great player, but overrated.



1. Orr
2. Robinson
3. Potvin



Harvey is probably somewhere between 2-4 but never really saw any games he played.

So neither Bourque nor Lidstrom nor Shore are in your top 4 defensemen?

 

[streitz]

So neither Bourque nor Lidstrom nor Shore are in your top 4 defensemen?

No.


One of them is in my top 5 though.

 

[quoipourquoi]

I think there might be too much baggage in saying someone is PLAYER X of POSITION Y based on a single quality (be it longevity or a high peak) when PLAYER X is a Gretzky or a Howe or an Orr.

There are other players besides those exceptional names that were incredible for ~17 years like Ray Bourque - they just may have played in a position that was less likely to consistently land All-Star selections than Defense.

 

[danincanada]

I think there might be too much baggage in saying someone is PLAYER X of POSITION Y based on a single quality (be it longevity or a high peak) when PLAYER X is a Gretzky or a Howe or an Orr.

There are other players besides those exceptional names that were incredible for ~17 years like Ray Bourque - they just may have played in a position that was less likely to consistently land All-Star selections than Defense.

Your m.o. recently seems to be to downgrade all defenders outside of Orr. Stud two-way defenseman like Bourque have never been easy to come by and you are severely underrating how valuable they are if you think it's just about comparing their AS nomination competition with other positions as if it's an apples to apples comparison. Their influence on their teams are not as easy to calculate as an offensive centre but it doesn't mean it has any less value.

Having a defenseman like that is a great place to start when building a team, just ask the Islanders because they built their dynasty starting with Potvin, then added the elite centre and winger later and look how they did.

 

[scott clam]

I think there might be too much baggage in saying someone is PLAYER X of POSITION Y based on a single quality (be it longevity or a high peak) when PLAYER X is a Gretzky or a Howe or an Orr.

There are other players besides those exceptional names that were incredible for ~17 years like Ray Bourque - they just may have played in a position that was less likely to consistently land All-Star selections than Defense.

Well, when comparing defensemen all star selections is a useful tool because there are more all star placements for defense than the other positions. So technically it is easier for Ray Bourque to make the first all star team than Gordie Howe. That both players have so many is a credit to their consistency. Gordie Howe of course holds the gold standard for consistency with 20 consecutive seasons in the top 5 in scoring. Ray Bourque on the other hand is the only first team all star in his first season and his 22nd and last season: that is truly remarkable and something you will never see again.

 

[quoipourquoi]

Well, when comparing defensemen all star selections is a useful tool because there are more all star placements for defense than the other positions. So technically it is easier for Ray Bourque to make the first all star team than Gordie Howe. That both players have so many is a credit to their consistency. Gordie Howe of course holds the gold standard for consistency with 20 consecutive seasons in the top 5 in scoring. Ray Bourque on the other hand is the only first team all star in his first season and his 22nd and last season: that is truly remarkable and something you will never see again.

But it’s also something that would only happen to a defenseman. What was the threshold for being the 1st Team All-Star on Defense in 2000-01? Being better than 67 games of Rob Blake - a great player, no doubt, but many players could say they had a better season than Blake’s abbreviated one.

Similarly, Bourque’s 2nd Team selection in 1998-99 had him edge out 68 games of Eric Desjardins and 67 games of Chris Pronger. Again, great players, but nothing like what Fleury, Lindros, and Sakic had to compete against when they went without the All-Star selection Bourque received despite having much better seasons than Bourque.

Four of Bourque’s selections between 1980-1996 came with just 60-67 games - something that barring a Lemieux-esque statistical domination would likely not occur at other positions that have greater competition for the top-2 or top-4 distinctions.

None of this is aimed at downgrading Ray Bourque; he was fantastic from 1980-1996 and still had some magic left for the final five years. But I do think the All-Star selection thing is overstated.

 

[scott clam]

But it’s also something that would only happen to a defenseman. What was the threshold for being the 1st Team All-Star on Defense in 2000-01? Being better than 67 games of Rob Blake - a great player, no doubt, but many players could say they had a better season than Blake’s abbreviated one.

Similarly, Bourque’s 2nd Team selection in 1998-99 had him edge out 68 games of Eric Desjardins and 67 games of Chris Pronger. Again, great players, but nothing like what Fleury, Lindros, and Sakic had to compete against when they went without the All-Star selection Bourque received despite having much better seasons than Bourque.

Four of Bourque’s selections between 1980-1996 came with just 60-67 games - something that barring a Lemieux-esque statistical domination would likely not occur at other positions that have greater competition for the top-2 or top-4 distinctions.

None of this is aimed at downgrading Ray Bourque; he was fantastic from 1980-1996 and still had some magic left for the final five years. But I do think the All-Star selection thing is overstated.

Well, as I had already stated, defense is of course the "easiest" position to get an all star nod, so the second slot for a defenseman on the first all star team is the same as being a second team allstar for any other position. Gordie Howe was the first team right wing in his 24th and 2nd last nhl season(before his first retirement). That on principle is more impressive than Bourque's "second first team" selection in his 22nd and last season. Bourque doesn't have anything on Howe except his rookie season(and possibly sophomore season), and obviously no one can touch Howe for longevity. but outside of those two does any player have an all star season after playing 20+years? Chelios has a "second first d" in 02(19th season) and Wayne has a second team C in 98(also his 19th). I can't think of anyone else in that ballpark at this moment...

Edit: how could I forget Lidstrom's Norris in 2011?!

Also, put "easiest" in quotations to avoid more confusion.

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

Well, as I had already stated, defense is of course the easiest position to get an all star nod, so the second slot for a defenseman on the first all star team is the same as being a second team allstar for any other position. Gordie Howe was the first team right wing in his 24th and 2nd last nhl season(before his first retirement). That on principle is more impressive than Bourque's "second first team" selection in his 22nd and last season. Bourque doesn't have anything on Howe except his rookie season(and possibly sophomore season), and obviously no one can touch Howe for longevity. but outside of those two does any player have an all star season after playing 20+years? Chelios has a "second first d" in 02(19th season) and Wayne has a second team C in 98(also his 19th). I can't think of anyone else in that ballpark at this moment...

how do you figure? just because there's 2 spots? There's also 2x as many defensemen in the league as there are centers.

 

[scott clam]

how do you figure? just because there's 2 spots? There's also 2x as many defensemen in the league as there are centers.

Elite D men have historically been rarer than elite centers, and typically take longer to develop. also teams typically dress 4 centers and 6 D so it's not quite twice as much(although rosters were smaller back in the day). Either way I probably should have put "easy" in quotations because there's nothing easy about it. But yes you're right by "easy" I was referring to the number of slots available and no other qualifiers.

 

[scott clam]

how do you figure? just because there's 2 spots? There's also 2x as many defensemen in the league as there are centers.

Another thing I should probably address is that sometimes you have a freak year where anotherwise "shallow position" is deeper than usual. Like last year, the top 4 left wings in allstar voting(Hall, Giroux, Ovechkin, Marchand) all had huge seasons that generated Hart buzz and the trophy itself for Hall. Of course this was also a freak year for Giroux because he's normally a center!

 

[quoipourquoi]

Another thing I should probably address is that sometimes you have a freak year where anotherwise "shallow position" is deeper than usual. Like last year, the top 4 left wings in allstar voting(Hall, Giroux, Ovechkin, Marchand) all had huge seasons that generated Hart buzz and the trophy itself for Hall. Of course this was also a freak year for Giroux because he's normally a center!

Absolutely. How often has the defensive All-Star been an unusually tough threshold in the post-WHA era? The 1st Team was strong in 1984, 1994, 1996, 2000, 2016, and 2017 - but I can’t recall a year where a 2nd Team wasn’t reasonably attainable (hence all the examples of 60-68 GP players like Bourque, Desjardins, Blake, and Pronger still occasionally snagging one).

Meanwhile, we’ve had top-5 Hart nominees go unrecognized on the All-Star Team at other positions with some frequency - notable examples including centers in 1989 and 1996; goaltenders in 1994, 2001, 2002; right wings in 2000.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

But it’s also something that would only happen to a defenseman. What was the threshold for being the 1st Team All-Star on Defense in 2000-01? Being better than 67 games of Rob Blake - a great player, no doubt, but many players could say they had a better season than Blake’s abbreviated one.

Similarly, Bourque’s 2nd Team selection in 1998-99 had him edge out 68 games of Eric Desjardins and 67 games of Chris Pronger. Again, great players, but nothing like what Fleury, Lindros, and Sakic had to compete against when they went without the All-Star selection Bourque received despite having much better seasons than Bourque.

Four of Bourque’s selections between 1980-1996 came with just 60-67 games - something that barring a Lemieux-esque statistical domination would likely not occur at other positions that have greater competition for the top-2 or top-4 distinctions.

None of this is aimed at downgrading Ray Bourque; he was fantastic from 1980-1996 and still had some magic left for the final five years. But I do think the All-Star selection thing is overstated.

I understand the argument that all-star selections for defenseman are easier to come by.

But there are not any other defensemen with 19 all-star selections, or 13 first team selections, are there?

 

[scott clam]

I understand the argument that all-star selections for defenseman are easier to come by.

But there are not any other defensemen with 19 all-star selections, or 13 first team selections, are there?

nope there certainly are not. so while Orr, Harvey and Lidstrom were voted best D in the league more times than Bourque no other player was considered to be in the top 2 more than he was. or top 4. so while this doesn't mean that Bourque is the greatest defenseman of all time or the greatest since Orr or the greatest thing since sliced bread or whatever, it does put him in some very exclusive company as a model of consistency and excellence(and consistency of excellence).

 

[seventieslord]

no other player was considered to be in the top 2 more than he was. or top 4.

You could take this even further and point out that no other player was considered to be top-4 as often as he was considered to be top-2.