Explain why Bobby Orr is consensus best D?

[Merya]

What are you talking about now? What claim?

The quip about Soviet tv.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

The quip about Soviet tv.

Another poster said the Soviet players saw Orr play on TV. In the Soviet Union.

So I asked if NHL games were broadcaster there around 1970. No quip, simple question. How the hell would I know what was on TV in Russia in 1970.

 

[Hennessy]

Oof. Some of the hot takes in this thread...yeesh.

 

[Fantomas]

[mod]

Not at all. A very interesting question.

Very, very unlikely anything from the NHL made it to the Soviet airwaves. Soviet league teams were on TV there all the time, as were many of the international tournaments.

Orr was most likely a mystery to the Soviet players, although it is possible, as you say, that there may have been video footage supplied to them. (but probably not)

 

[Canadiens1958]

Not at all. A very interesting question.

Very, very unlikely anything from the NHL made it to the Soviet airwaves. Soviet league teams were on TV there all the time, as were many of the international tournaments.

Orr was most likely a mystery to the Soviet players, although it is possible, as you say, that there may have been video footage supplied to them. (but probably not)

Soviet teams touring NA played against Bobby Orr as part of Junior All Star teams, saw him play in person as guests in NHL arenas and watched NHL games on TV while in NA.

 

[Fantomas]

Soviet teams touring NA played against Bobby Orr as part of Junior All Star teams, saw him play in person as guests in NHL arenas and watched NHL games on TV while in NA.

That's probably the only kind of exposure these players got and out of this I suppose word of mouth.

 

[zcaptain]

Which is why he lost Hart to his own teammate and a few to Bobby Clarke.

Funny: Russian players repeatedly said that Orr came back to his zone defensively only on holidays.

Maybe the Russians in Jersey...….not the ones Orr played against

 

[Sentinel]

When did he? In his ranking of the top Canadian players in NHL history, Bowman had Lafleur #11 and Orr #1.

Are you misinformed or do you just like to make stuff up?

Sorry, my memory failed me. You are both right, and I'm wrong.

 

[Sentinel]

37-year old Bobby Hull played very well.

You can really see how good Perreault and Potvin were in the '76 Canada Cup.

Orr played great but as others have said, he was a shadow of his healthier self.

Perreault -- yes, but Potvin keeps getting exposed and penalized.

I mostly noticed Orr when he failed to score from just outside Tretiak's crease.

 

[zcaptain]

One must appreciate Orr played the 76 series basically on one leg......he did not last much longer

He was still the best

 

[zcaptain]

Just so everyone does not question my love for Orr

We are talking a microscopic thread of difference offensively...….basically, a dead heat
Where Orr passes him is defensively, and physically

Howe would be 3rd offensively if not further down, but then again Gretzky never went in the
corners with Howe....proof? Gretzky is still alive.

Please note...…..I love watching Gretzky...……….I love hockey!...…….he was incredible!

We are splitting hairs!

 

[zcaptain]

PS

I think this pretty much answers the original question about why was Orr the best Defensemen
Because he was arguably the best, period.

 

[Merya]

Another poster said the Soviet players saw Orr play on TV. In the Soviet Union.

So I asked if NHL games were broadcaster there around 1970. No quip, simple question. How the hell would I know what was on TV in Russia in 1970.

Not on TV prolly. But it would be really silly to assume that Soviets didn't get their hands on every possible tape they would've wanted. It's not like public hockey games were in any way restricted material in north america, so ofcource kgb or even lesser "players" got their hands to the recordings.

 

[DannyGallivan]

This might be the best post I've ever read here. Definitely one of my personal top 3.

I'm a Bruins fan who was just a baby when Orr was tearing up the NHL. I have no recollection of seeing him play on TV, nevermind in person. So, I only have YouTube, this forum, and my older friends and family as my connection to Orr. That being said, I have a tremendous appreciation for his contributions to the sport, and to the Boston Bruins. The Bruins were in very bad shape in the early 60s, and Orr pretty much saved and resurrected the franchise. No exaggeration.

Mr. Gallivan's 7 points make a stunning case for best defenseman of all time, and certainly made me think about the Orr/Gretzky debate.

I am thoroughly impressed, and there was alot there that I did not know. Thank you for sharing this.

Hats off to you, Sir.

Well thanks, I appreciate that.

When I was a kid, we'd see the Bruins on the occasional Saturday on Hockey Night in Canada... maybe a few times a year (except in the playoffs). I grew up in a Habs-loving household, so we'd watch the Canadiens on the French channel if the Leafs were on English. But if Boston was playing the Leafs, we'd switch back and forth (which was difficult with no remote control, but our family had me who'd sit inches from the television to turn the knob between Espo, Orr and the Bruins playing Toronto and whoever the Habs were playing).

I was too young to see Orr for much of his prime... only started watching the NHL in the '73-74 season. But even if you didn't follow hockey in the 70's, everybody knew who Bobby Orr was.

 

[danincanada]

I'd like to be able to say there's an argument against Orr but I don't really see it. I don't think the NHL was nearly as competitive during his era as now but his level of domination was so huge it's hard to pretend to know how much the gap would close in a tougher league with more great players. Was he really a defenseman or more of a rover? I'd tend to say he was more of a rover but it doesn't really matter, he's up there with Wayne and Mario in my opinion and it's hard to question how great any of those 3 were because what they did looked so magical.

 

[Midnight Judges]

I'd like to be able to say there's an argument against Orr but I don't really see it.

Of course there is: Longevity. It is a glaring weakness. Orr played 8.5 seasons (sort of).

Longevity just happens to have an extremely low value among hockey fans relative to fans of other sports.

That said I still think Orr is the greatest D man, as in, if I were a GM knowing I would only get 8.5 seasons of Orr, I still take him over Ray Bourque's 17 consecutive seasons of being a top 5 defenseman plus the rest of his career. If people think that's a no-brainer, then I don't think they have thought things through properly.

 

[danincanada]

Of course there is: Longevity. It is a glaring weakness. Orr played 8.5 seasons (sort of).

Longevity just happens to have an extremely low value among hockey fans relative to fans of other sports.

That said I still think Orr is the greatest D man, as in, if I were a GM knowing I would only get 8.5 seasons of Orr, I still take him over Ray Bourque's 17 consecutive seasons of being a top 5 defenseman plus the rest of his career. If people think that's a no-brainer, then I don't think they have thought things through properly.

I guess there is a "what if" there that is presumptuous. I don't think Orr was going to slow down anytime soon after '76 had he avoided the injuries, or even if they had the same medical technology we have now for knees. He proved enough to me even if his career was cut short. In some alternate universe he and Gretzky went head to head in the early 80's and it was awesome.

I guess one could try to make the argument for Bourque or Lidstrom due to career value. I've thought about it but Orr's dominance is too much to overcome and I give him the benefit of a doubt because he had his knees botched but it's very unlikely that would happen in the modern era.

 

[DannyGallivan]

Not at all. A very interesting question.

Very, very unlikely anything from the NHL made it to the Soviet airwaves. Soviet league teams were on TV there all the time, as were many of the international tournaments.

Orr was most likely a mystery to the Soviet players, although it is possible, as you say, that there may have been video footage supplied to them. (but probably not)

I heard accounts that the Soviets were well versed with Bobby Hull, whom they saw on Soviet television. I don't know if that extended to many other stars.

 

[DannyGallivan]

Of course there is: Longevity. It is a glaring weakness. Orr played 8.5 seasons (sort of).

Longevity just happens to have an extremely low value among hockey fans relative to fans of other sports.

That said I still think Orr is the greatest D man, as in, if I were a GM knowing I would only get 8.5 seasons of Orr, I still take him over Ray Bourque's 17 consecutive seasons of being a top 5 defenseman plus the rest of his career. If people think that's a no-brainer, then I don't think they have thought things through properly.

You can go two ways on this, and both ways favour Orr.

1. He did far more than any other player in his roughly 8.5 seasons.
2. Longevity has based more on luck than anything else.

 

[The Panther]

You can go two ways on this, and both ways favour Orr.

1. He did far more than any other player in his roughly 8.5 seasons.
2. Longevity has based more on luck than anything else.

1. Orr did not do more than Wayne Gretzky in each's 8.5 first seasons. I would argue he did notably less.
2. Longevity has a little bit to do with luck, but also a lot to do with a player's awareness and choices. Orr has said several times that he himself is to "blame" for his shortened career, because he intentionally played a rushing style that got him in trouble along the boards, etc. The matter is, would Orr have been "Orr" if he didn't play that style? You could say the same about Lindros. Gordie Howe, after injuries at the start of his career, made a choice to be a mean SOB who elbowed opponents in the head before they had a chance to do the same to him; Gretzky made a choice to play as light as a feather and avoid being hit. Both had long careers. This wasn't all down to luck.

 

[Midnight Judges]

1. Orr did not do more than Wayne Gretzky in each's 8.5 first seasons. I would argue he did notably less.
2. Longevity has a little bit to do with luck, but also a lot to do with a player's awareness and choices. Orr has said several times that he himself is to "blame" for his shortened career, because he intentionally played a rushing style that got him in trouble along the boards, etc. The matter is, would Orr have been "Orr" if he didn't play that style? You could say the same about Lindros. Gordie Howe, after injuries at the start of his career, made a choice to be a mean SOB who elbowed opponents in the head before they had a chance to do the same to him; Gretzky made a choice to play as light as a feather and avoid being hit. Both had long careers. This wasn't all down to luck.

Well said.

And I would add: Some level of luck is always in the mix regarding sports. Genetics are luck. The household they grew up in is luck. If Orr was born to have a 110 pound frame, none of us would even know his name. He could have been born in Zimbabwe. etc.

Anyway, I have no probable judging players based on durability. It's a fact of life in sports, and it's inextricable from what defines a player. No excuses.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Well said.

And I would add: Some level of luck is always in the mix regarding sports. Genetics are luck. The household they grew up in is luck. If Orr was born to have a 110 pound frame, none of us would even know his name. He could have been born in Zimbabwe. etc.

Anyway, I have no probable judging players based on durability. It's a fact of life in sports, and it's inextricable from what defines a player. No excuses.

Incompetent team medical care is not luck but negligence.

 

[ScaredStreit]

Not sure why you mentioned Lidstrom because tbh Potvin and Bourque's peak and probably primes are easily better than Lidstrom's (careers not necessarily). Orr is on a completely different level. Not only did he change the game forever but he's the best offensive defenseman and at that time was the best defensive defenseman too...that just gets overshadowed by his ridiculous stats.

 

[TT1]

Simple, compare him to his peers. The guy was putting up 2-3x more points than the 2nd highest scoring dman in the NHL.

No player in the NHL has dominated their peers as much as Orr did during his time. That's the main reason why i think having Orr ahead of Gretzky isn't far fetched (like Bowman does), he re-defined a position and annihilated every other dman in the league in terms of production.

 

[BobbyAwe]

-It would of been way more impressive if there wasnt 12 teams in the league when he was playing with 6 new expansion teams at the height of the expansion era. 6 Teams were added in 1967, and all 6 of those teams added completely sucked. I also must point out that every player in the Orr era was Canadian. Now, Canadian players make up roughly 40% of the NHL since we are at a worldwide level.

-In short, Bobby Orr is arguably one of if not the best skater of all time. Ill give him that. He was terrific in his time. But Orr's stats would plummet in todays NHL. The speed game is much faster and while Orr abused his competition in the 1960s with speed on crap skates, he isnt Pavel Bure fast.

You speak the truth, PS. As you may have guessed, Bobby is my favorite all-time player (being a Bruin fan since 1968) but I too am a REALIST. The only thing I am certain of regarding Bobby is that he was the greatest player of his time and the time before him. Among the players of his day there was an overwhelming consensus he was the best, even Milt Schmidt and Gordie Howe said he was the most talented player they had ever seen and they dated back to the 40's and even 30's. However, you are right to point out that the league was watered down by 50% the year after Bobby came up and continued to add expansion teams at a great pace for the rest of his shortened career. Bobby wouldn't put up anywhere near the numbers as a young player today that he did back then, and even he has pointed that out. He's certainly in the mix as the greatest player ever but not a shoe-in. (I don't know how or if we can even accurately compare defensemen with forwards?) He was an extremely talented player with a revolutionary style which no one knew how to defend against at the time and he had as much heart as talent. He is rightfully a legend and that's where I leave it.