If Bobby Orr Didn't Have Knee Issues, How Much Better Would His Career have Been?

BigBadBruins7708

Registered User
Dec 11, 2017
13,579
18,347
Las Vegas
Bourque wasn't really the two-way stud yet in the first three years of his career tho. And Park's knees ironically were becoming a problem, so he needed help back there a bit. And McTavish wasn't quite ready that year. Not yet.


The other what-if... what if Orr played as a forward? How many more points would he have scored?

187 pts in 212 games, +103, Calder, 2x 1st team, 1x 2nd team, 4-4-2 in Norris voting...yeah, he was a stud from day 1.

Orr played 9 full seasons before the injuries won out.

He had 259/611/870, +579 in only 621 games.
3x Hart
8x Norris
8x 1st team
Calder
2x Ross
5x led the league in assists
2x Cup
2 Smythe

His last full season he was only 26 (for comparison Karlsson is currently 27).

Say he is healthy and can play to 35. That gives him a few huge advantages. 1) he plays in the early 80s, and 2) he plays with Bourque.

It not out of the question to think he missed out on:

700-900 points
4-7 Norris
1-3 Harts
Cups are hard to predict, but with a healthy Bobby Orr, I think its likely the Bruins win the late 70s Cups and not the Flyers/Habs

That would put him far beyond Gretzky with:

1300-1500 points
11-15 Norris
4-7 Harts
11-15 1st team all star
 

VMBM

And it didn't even bring me down
Sep 24, 2008
3,797
754
Helsinki, Finland
Thank you for writing this; I have always felt the series would have gone differently had he been healthy and played in The Series...

Even with Orr on the roster they would have still been ill-prepared for the series. Although I can see Orr as a player who would've adapted quickly, and even dominated, I don't see him changing the results of game 1 and 4, for example; so badly did Canada play as a team in those games. So, imo it's still a close series when they head to Moscow. And what if a healthy Kharlamov plays in all of those last 3 games? Surely if one ponders the impact of Orr in the series, one must also consider the impact of Kharlamov. (Obviously I'm not saying that they were equally good, but there's a reason why Kharlamov was deliberately injured and why his performance in the series is legendary.)

The Bruins were heavily favoured to win the 1971 Playoff series against the Canadiens, but even Bobby Orr couldn't lead them to a victory. Is it certain that he completely changes things in 1972? A healthy Bobby Orr AND Bobby Hull on the 1972 Team Canada, now that might have made a big difference...
 

Dennis Bonvie

Registered User
Dec 29, 2007
29,206
17,561
Connecticut
Bobby Orr is almost undisputedly considered the greatest defenceman of all time, and one of the four greatest players of all time. However, knee injuries really disrupted the latter periods of his career, and I wonder how much longer he could have played at such a high level if it wasn't for these issues.

So I'm asking if Bobby Orr didn't have knee issues how much longer would he have played, how many more points do you think he would have finished with, how many more individual trophies do you think he would have won, and do you think he would be able to dethrone Gretzky as the greatest hockey player of all time in the minds of most fans?
Bobby Orr is almost undisputedly considered the greatest defenceman of all time, and one of the four greatest players of all time. However, knee injuries really disrupted the latter periods of his career, and I wonder how much longer he could have played at such a high level if it wasn't for these issues.

So I'm asking if Bobby Orr didn't have knee issues how much longer would he have played, how many more points do you think he would have finished with, how many more individual trophies do you think he would have won, and do you think he would be able to dethrone Gretzky as the greatest hockey player of all time in the minds of most fans?

Not sure if anyone else has mentioned this, but Orr had knee problems his entire NHL career, not just at the end.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BNHL

FerrisRox

"Wanna go, Prettyboy?"
Sep 17, 2003
20,266
12,895
Toronto, Ontario
The "what if" I often think about with Bobby Orr is if he were healthy and had a career similar to other great blue liners, he would have played deep into the 1980's... Imagine the Bruins power play with Orr and Ray Bourque paired together!
 

BobbyAwe

Registered User
Nov 21, 2006
3,442
883
South Carolina
Not sure if anyone else has mentioned this, but Orr had knee problems his entire NHL career, not just at the end.

Right - injured the first time in his first year. So the question is not only how many more great seasons he would have had, but whether ANY of his top seasons really represented him at his best?
 

a79krgm

Registered User
Jul 15, 2006
1,545
372
White Bear Lake
www.northstarshockey.com
I'm not a doctor, but I'm sure it goes without saying that today's arthroscopic surgical techniques would have greatly enhanced his abilities and prolonged his career. The Bruins would have at least one more Stanly Cup banner hanging from the rafters and perhaps, we may have seen the Great Bobby Orr share the same blue line with a young Ray Bourque.
 

Thenameless

Registered User
Apr 29, 2014
3,854
1,788
Well, I already have Bobby Orr grudgingly as #1, so with a fully healthy career I imagine the he widens the gap and is more of a clear-cut winner with other hockey fans.

He still wouldn't pass Gretzky/Lemieux for certain fans because of recency bias (or just plain never having seen Orr play), plus Gretzky still has those four gaudy 200+ point seasons which are a superhuman feat on their own.
 

bobholly39

Registered User
Mar 10, 2013
22,078
14,589
Well, I already have Bobby Orr grudgingly as #1, so with a fully healthy career I imagine the he widens the gap and is more of a clear-cut winner with other hockey fans.

He still wouldn't pass Gretzky/Lemieux for certain fans because of recency bias (or just plain never having seen Orr play), plus Gretzky still has those four gaudy 200+ point seasons which are a superhuman feat on their own.

Those are great. But with Gretzky it's more about him being the best player, always, that matters for me. That's why I have him as #1 no questions asked.

Playoffs? No problem, he's the top scorer every year.
Regular season? Yep, no fail, every year.
International best on best tournament? Yep, he's got that too.

He literally never failed, not even once, at delivering the very best performance possible.

Eventually Lemieux became better than him/he slowed down with age - but I mean before that (and sometimes after that too).

Doesn't Orr have at least a few important disappointments in contrast? Some playoff years, etc?

I think for me - it's more that that still sets Gretzky apart, and i have trouble envisioning differently.

Also - Orr seems to get the Bossy treatment. More would certainly be better. Well - more is sometimes better, but what if he declined a lot with age? If he declined a lot, even moreso than Gretzky - i think his mystique/case for #1 actually goes away very fast. To be fair I think defensemen usually decline less than forwards (and often get better with age) - but it's still a hypothetical, and different for each player, so hard to say for sure.
 

Thenameless

Registered User
Apr 29, 2014
3,854
1,788
I can't argue with Gretzky's top level consistency. What I do believe though, is that on a given day when both are at their peak powers, Bobby Orr can deliver more to a hockey team overall, than any of the other Big 3. Gordie Howe and Bobby Orr have the more well rounded skillsets out of the Big 4, but I think Orr has a slightly higher gear than Howe.
 

FerrisRox

"Wanna go, Prettyboy?"
Sep 17, 2003
20,266
12,895
Toronto, Ontario
No it's not and you know it. You just don't want admit it.
Bobby played D like Superman would play D. Noone else would be able to repeat it. That is bad defensive play covered by superhuman abilities. It can result in effective defence bcs of those abilities but it's not good/smart/sound.
Not sure if other Euros share my views btw.

This is one of the silliest posts I've seen in the History of Hockey board.

First things first: how old are you? I find it impossible to believe you actually watched Bobby Orr play and arrived at this conclusion.
 

Asheville

Registered User
Feb 1, 2018
2,056
1,358
A Bobby Orr without injuries is a Bobby Orr that isn't Bobby Orr. His style meant having a short career, which is the same for all the other awesome yet short careers.
 

Staniowski

Registered User
Jan 13, 2018
3,508
3,057
The Maritimes
do you think he would be able to dethrone Gretzky as the greatest hockey player of all time in the minds of most fans?
When THN did their ranking in 1997, Orr and Gretzky each received 18 1st-place votes out of 50 (so 36% each), so nobody has majority support. Of course, that means 28% chose players other than Orr and Gretzky too.
 

Bluesguru

Registered User
Aug 10, 2014
1,957
823
St. Louis
oh wow, i never knew that. espo + vadnais for park + ratelle. then at the end of the season hodge follows espo to NY and the Bs get nifty.

hate to lose esposito, but that is a nice nice haul for boston isn't it?

Yeah, you can thank Emile Francis for that trade. He wanted to make a deal bad to shake up the Rangers because they got off to a slow start and he really had his eye on Espo. Silly move by Francis but he was the one who contacted Boston and pushed hard to make a deal.
 

Big Phil

Registered User
Nov 2, 2003
31,703
4,144
If Orr never had bad knees. Hmmm. Are you ready for the Butterfly Effect?

Alright, he plays in the 1972 Summit Series. The Soviets put up a fight, they impress us more than we thought, but Canada goes 6-2 against them. So no Paul Henderson needed. He also plays in the 1979 Challenge Cup and helps the NHL team win. So maybe the Soviets aren't as mighty as possible and there is no "Miracle On Ice" in 1980?

He keeps winning Norrises. He won 8 as it was, but nothing stops him from winning 11 or 12. He'd have some serious contenders in Potvin and Robinson's big years and maybe he has a "down" year that is low enough that one of them still wins their Norris but he is winning these things even into the 1980s.

Who knows what happens with the Habs dynasty of the 1970s. Maybe nothing changes, who knows, as Orr never beat Montreal in the playoffs as it was. But does he stop an Islander dynasty? The green Islanders played Boston in 1980. It is foolish to think Orr couldn't tip the scales.

At the end of the day with a full career he makes a strong argument that he had the best career there ever was, even over Gretzky. Of course, if we afford Orr this benefit then we have to give Gretzky a full functioning back in his later years too.
 

pbgoalie

Registered User
Aug 8, 2010
5,989
3,573
If Orr never had bad knees. Hmmm. Are you ready for the Butterfly Effect?

Alright, he plays in the 1972 Summit Series. The Soviets put up a fight, they impress us more than we thought, but Canada goes 6-2 against them. So no Paul Henderson needed. He also plays in the 1979 Challenge Cup and helps the NHL team win. So maybe the Soviets aren't as mighty as possible and there is no "Miracle On Ice" in 1980?

He keeps winning Norrises. He won 8 as it was, but nothing stops him from winning 11 or 12. He'd have some serious contenders in Potvin and Robinson's big years and maybe he has a "down" year that is low enough that one of them still wins their Norris but he is winning these things even into the 1980s.

Who knows what happens with the Habs dynasty of the 1970s. Maybe nothing changes, who knows, as Orr never beat Montreal in the playoffs as it was. But does he stop an Islander dynasty? The green Islanders played Boston in 1980. It is foolish to think Orr couldn't tip the scales.

At the end of the day with a full career he makes a strong argument that he had the best career there ever was, even over Gretzky. Of course, if we afford Orr this benefit then we have to give Gretzky a full functioning back in his later years too.

And Bossy and Lemiuex etc
I grew up a Rangers fan, with parents holding season seats. Got to see Orr quite a bit, and to think he was rarely healthy is frightening to be honest. I've never seen any player complete control the tempo of game since. Gretzky was amazing, and his vision of everything was crazy, but watching Orr was like watching a different species to me. If he had somehow avoided the first couple injuries, it would have been quite a sight!
 

sharkhawk

Registered User
Jun 1, 2013
1,933
561
Aurora, IL
If Orr never had bad knees. Hmmm. Are you ready for the Butterfly Effect?

Alright, he plays in the 1972 Summit Series. The Soviets put up a fight, they impress us more than we thought, but Canada goes 6-2 against them. So no Paul Henderson needed. He also plays in the 1979 Challenge Cup and helps the NHL team win. So maybe the Soviets aren't as mighty as possible and there is no "Miracle On Ice" in 1980?

He keeps winning Norrises. He won 8 as it was, but nothing stops him from winning 11 or 12. He'd have some serious contenders in Potvin and Robinson's big years and maybe he has a "down" year that is low enough that one of them still wins their Norris but he is winning these things even into the 1980s.

Who knows what happens with the Habs dynasty of the 1970s. Maybe nothing changes, who knows, as Orr never beat Montreal in the playoffs as it was. But does he stop an Islander dynasty? The green Islanders played Boston in 1980. It is foolish to think Orr couldn't tip the scales.

At the end of the day with a full career he makes a strong argument that he had the best career there ever was, even over Gretzky. Of course, if we afford Orr this benefit then we have to give Gretzky a full functioning back in his later years too.

Would it be a bruins dynasty if Orr didn’t have the knee problems? Orr moved to the hawks in 76 and it isn’t because the bruins didn’t want him, but because wirtz had a back room deal with eagleson to make it happen. Would it have turned out differently without the knee injuries? Who knows, but he still might have ended up with the hawks
 

VMBM

And it didn't even bring me down
Sep 24, 2008
3,797
754
Helsinki, Finland
Alright, he plays in the 1972 Summit Series. The Soviets put up a fight, they impress us more than we thought, but Canada goes 6-2 against them. So no Paul Henderson needed. He also plays in the 1979 Challenge Cup and helps the NHL team win. So maybe the Soviets aren't as mighty as possible and there is no "Miracle On Ice" in 1980?

:laugh: Wishful thinking to the max.

Sorry, but sometimes this 'downplaying the Soviets' thing goes too far. The NHL All-Stars were owned in 1979; no ifs or buts. The 2nd game was maybe close regarding the final score (5-4), but the game itself wasn't close at all (the shots 31-16 for USSR, when had that happened before?). You may whine about preparation time and chemistry and whatnot, but it's not 'cool' to change the result of that series; Team USSR was so much better in the end. And does Bobby Orr help in 1981 too? You know, change that 8-1 score?

USA's win at the 1980 Olympics would have been considered a miracle regardless, although maybe not from the blinkered Canadian view. It's amazing you fail to see that. At the 1979 World Championship, USSR beat Czechoslovakia 11-1 and 6-1, Sweden 11-3 and 9-3 etc. The Challenge Cup was just one demonstration of Soviet hockey power around 1979.

And for the umpteenth time; Boston was heavily favoured to beat Montreal in the 1971 playoffs. The peak Bobby Orr led that team. But they lost. That Boston team of the early 1970s was pretty stacked, but they lost every other year except for 1970 and 1972 (both times not having to face the Habs in the playoffs). One player does not quarantee a win, if the teams are otherwise close.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Batis

Merya

Jokerit & Finland; anti-theist
Sep 23, 2008
2,279
418
Helsinki
Assuming Orr helps Canada win the summitseries decisevily, the modernization of Canada (and NHL) hockey might not happen and the shock happens in the 80's with USSR winning absolutely everything except the miracle.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->