Mario Lemieux vs Bobby Orr?

[Killion]

Bobby Orr was a phenom but I really don't know if he actually changed anything about the game, as no defenseman has ever even come CLOSE since that time to assuming the same role that he did. Goalies continued to be relative pylons all through the 80s until the butterfly + bigger pads arrived.

Oh goodness, no, he revolutionised the North American game, came along at just the right time in fact CL. Individual records aside, his arrival inspired Coaches from the amateurs levels right on through & up to the NHL to apply new thinking, applying new strategies to the game. Moving with greater frequency forwards to defence & defenceman to forward on the PP, defence fully engaged in offence. That included the goalie from the crease on out who when playing now with fleet footed mobile rushing defenceman would play farther out, as an almost 3rd defenceman in playing the puck forward, part of the transition from full on defence to offence. Orr inspiring entire generations of players all through the late 60's & 70's, and absolutely the game altered, changed forever, though contemporaneously the Summit Series in 72 amongst other major international events also contributed to the changes, Expansion & the WHA etc. The 06 era, you had a decidedly conservative & somewhat antiquated, not terribly creative style of play, regimentation, playing the lanes, defenders rarely crossing the opposition blue-line, goalies with the exception of Plante staying in their creases, playing deep. No, quite the change from pre-to-post Orr, of that I can assure you as I played the game myself during that era, one of innovation & adaptation, a new way of playing, everything shaken up & stirred. Old school replaced with new, far more colours added to the palette.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

The reason Gretzky at #4 would raise my eyebrows is because it usually results from some crazy double standards. For example - rating Howe over Gretzky means the person is going by either longevity or complete game, perhaps a strong combination of both. It's impossible to argue that Howe peaked higher. But having Orr over Gretzky is usually complete game and maybe some peak (if you think Orr peaked higher - that's very debatable). Having Lemieux over Gretzky is usually "what ifs" and peak, assuming people think Lemieux peaked higher (again, very debatable). The problem is, to have ALL 3 above him means you have to judge Gretzky vs Howe on longevity, while ignoring longevity in the Gretzky vs Orr and Lemieux debates. Putting Orr and Howe above Gretzky means you must favor complete game - but then you must be ignoring complete game in judging Gretzky vs Lemieux, who had even less complete game than Gretzky did.

Usually it comes down to this - Gretzky was small and weak, and the people who rank him 4th want guys like Howe and Orr, who were strong and tough, or Lemieux who could bulldoze through 2 Dmen and score with a guy riding his back like a pack mule. They aren't judging by what he accomplished, but by the WAY in which he accomplished it. They have crazy double standards, where they'll praise guys like Howe for his longevity and for finishing top 5 in scoring 20 straight seasons, but then try to argue Lemieux over Gretzky based on team strength and PPG averages for partial seasons, not actual scoring results.

I don't think this is true at all.

Some people appreciate the fact that there is more to the game than just putting up points. Orr & Howe impacted the game significantly all over the ice, not just from the red line in.

 

[Rhiessan71]

You still dont understand that no individual Norris Trophy-season by a player was just as good as any other winning the award. My 55 percent of Gretzky-rate was purely rethorical since we all here are aware, and has brought up, that some of Gretzkys Hart seasons was over the moon.
One could legitimately claim that becouse only two of five skaters on the ice are defensemen, that would naturally lower the Norris pure mathematical value on a career basis by the same ratio.(Please remember, pure mathematics in hockey statistics are not so pure). All i'm trying to say is that we should not be shocked that Phil Esposito has as many Harts as Bobby Orr. And we should therefore all be prepared to at least consider a current Norris holder the notion of being "Best in the game". Just as is the case with the Vezina i guess.

Just like not all Harts are equal, nor are all Norris' either.

Suffice to say, a straight conversion is not going to work.
I mean hell, what value would you give Bourque's 5 Norris to Lidstrom's 7?
No way are Lid's 7 equal to Bourque's 5.
Bourque has 2 of them where he was the Hart runner up to Gretz himself once and really, won a Hart in another.
Those 2 Norris of Bourque's ARE equal to 2 Harts by any definition IMO.

That's before we even get into Orr's 8 heh, how many of those years was Orr clearly the best player in the League but still didn't win the Hart? 7 at least!

And remember before you respond, you are the one that opened the award equality door on this.
You can't say that not all Harts are equal and then turn around and say all Norris' are.

 

[seventieslord]

42 games of pp hockey lol, I now know how what your opinion is worth.

He's absolutely right.

 

[Pominville Knows]

Just like not all Harts are equal, nor are all Norris' either.

Suffice to say, a straight conversion is not going to work.
I mean hell, what value would you give Bourque's 5 Norris to Lidstrom's 7?
No way are Lid's 7 equal to Bourque's 5.
Bourque has 2 of them where he was the Hart runner up to Gretz himself once and really, won a Hart in another.
Those 2 Norris of Bourque's ARE equal to 2 Harts by any definition IMO.

That's before we even get into Orr's 8 heh, how many of those years was Orr clearly the best player in the League but still didn't win the Hart? 7 at least!

And remember before you respond, you are the one that opened the award equality door on this.
You can't say that not all Harts are equal and then turn around and say all Norris' are.

Yes you have a point, the biggest problem in this kind of award calculation would be the BIG-3 FORWARDS effect on D's like Bourque. Him and other defensemen(Forwards too but that's another matter) needs to have Gretzky, Lemieux and probably Howe removed and get a bonus for that to add to his five Norrises. If we only get the average percentages right this if nothing else would give us a cool MVP-count for each player. Still even with the big-3 forwards removed we would have difference in domination within ones positions respective award, but i really would just enjoy getting a count for all positions combined.

 

[Irato99]

I don't think this is true at all.

Some people appreciate the fact that there is more to the game than just putting up points. Orr & Howe impacted the game significantly all over the ice, not just from the red line in.

But some people forget that Gretzky played most of his career on the penalty kill, which mostly occurs on the defensive zone, and as a bonus he was still an offensive threat. People also forget that anywhere on the ice a takeaway is as good if not better than a hit, it's basically the same thing done differently. As shazariahl previously said, it's not the way an accomplishment is done that matters, just like a game is won with the score and not how it was played.

 

[habsfanatics*]

He's absolutely right.

Wonderful insight.

 

[Cursed Lemon]

Oh goodness, no, he revolutionised the North American game, came along at just the right time in fact CL. Individual records aside, his arrival inspired Coaches from the amateurs levels right on through & up to the NHL to apply new thinking, applying new strategies to the game. Moving with greater frequency forwards to defence & defenceman to forward on the PP, defence fully engaged in offence. That included the goalie from the crease on out who when playing now with fleet footed mobile rushing defenceman would play farther out, as an almost 3rd defenceman in playing the puck forward, part of the transition from full on defence to offence. Orr inspiring entire generations of players all through the late 60's & 70's, and absolutely the game altered, changed forever, though contemporaneously the Summit Series in 72 amongst other major international events also contributed to the changes, Expansion & the WHA etc. The 06 era, you had a decidedly conservative & somewhat antiquated, not terribly creative style of play, regimentation, playing the lanes, defenders rarely crossing the opposition blue-line, goalies with the exception of Plante staying in their creases, playing deep. No, quite the change from pre-to-post Orr, of that I can assure you as I played the game myself during that era, one of innovation & adaptation, a new way of playing, everything shaken up & stirred. Old school replaced with new, far more colours added to the palette.

Why would Bobby Orr have changed the way goalies play...?

 

[Killion]

Why would Bobby Orr have changed the way goalies play...?

He influenced generations of players, the younger guys at the elite levels who went on to Junior & Pro copying him, carrying the puck into the oppositions end, playing Defence really like a Rover, usually paired with a Stay-At-Home type Defensive partner. These guys would often get caught deep in the other end, a lot of 2 on 1 or 3 on 1 breaks coming back at ya, full-on breakaways. If the puck squirted loose on an errant pass or whatever, you as the goalie had to be on your feet, an excellent skater & stickhandler to intercept & play it; additionally, angles, playing on top of the crease by in some cases 5' out or more critical, mastering the old Johnny Bower Poke Check beyond effective. Playing the puck & keeping it in motion instead of holding it for a face-off in a scramble. With a rushing defenceman nearby who was more than capable of turning on the jets and peeling off down the ice leaving the opposition flatfooted, a sharp Goalie would "think" offensively (had some serious hockey IQ, saw the entire surface, knew exactly who was where and what they were capable of). Previously everything, the Defencemen & the Goaltenders were taught to think & play exclusively defensively. As a Goalie thereafter you'd range out, play the puck a lot more, a good Goalie in fact quarterbacking whenever the opportunity arose an entire attack with 4 guys transitioning from Defence to Offence. As a Goalie, being Aggressive extremely important when playing with Rushing Defenceman, and that included facing them when they were coming at you.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

But some people forget that Gretzky played most of his career on the penalty kill, which mostly occurs on the defensive zone, and as a bonus he was still an offensive threat. People also forget that anywhere on the ice a takeaway is as good if not better than a hit, it's basically the same thing done differently. As shazariahl previously said, it's not the way an accomplishment is done that matters, just like a game is won with the score and not how it was played.

All of the top offensive players in the 70s & 80s played on the PK. Mario has the single season record for short-handed goals and Gretzky the career record. It wasn't because of their defensive play.

 

[Killion]

All of the top offensive players in the 70s & 80s played on the PK. Mario has the single season record for short-handed goals and Gretzky the career record. It wasn't because of their defensive play.

Correct Mr.Bonvie. Transition. Rushing Defenceman or as in the case of a Gretzky or Lemieux, playing Semi-Forward/Defence but essentially a Rover on the PK as per Orr. Entirely different way of "thinking" the game. Opportunists. Carrying the puck. Ragging it if necessary. Playing Keep Away, and going in for the kill.

 

[Irato99]

All of the top offensive players in the 70s & 80s played on the PK. Mario has the single season record for short-handed goals and Gretzky the career record. It wasn't because of their defensive play.

It's a well known fact that top offensive players before Gretzky rarely played PK, Lafleur has 3 career SH goals, Bossy has 8, Gretzky has 73...
And defensive play is not just crushing a player on the boards, to score that much you have to find ways to use defense to convert into offense.

 

[Hardyvan123]

Just like not all Harts are equal, nor are all Norris' either.

Suffice to say, a straight conversion is not going to work.
I mean hell, what value would you give Bourque's 5 Norris to Lidstrom's 7?
No way are Lid's 7 equal to Bourque's 5.
Bourque has 2 of them where he was the Hart runner up to Gretz himself once and really, won a Hart in another.
Those 2 Norris of Bourque's ARE equal to 2 Harts by any definition IMO.

That's before we even get into Orr's 8 heh, how many of those years was Orr clearly the best player in the League but still didn't win the Hart? 7 at least!

And remember before you respond, you are the one that opened the award equality door on this.
You can't say that not all Harts are equal and then turn around and say all Norris' are.

I thought AO won the Hart this year?

The subjectivity of the "value" of awards over time is extremely debatable here.

Much like Clarke's two Hart's when Orr had full seasons.

A type of "double counting" then takes place.

Context is extremely important but let's not overstate things here either.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

It's a well known fact that top offensive players before Gretzky rarely played PK, Lafleur has 3 career SH goals, Bossy has 8, Gretzky has 73...
And defensive play is not just crushing a player on the boards, to score that much you have to find ways to use defense to convert into offense.

Marcel Dionne had 10 shorties in 74-75.

Perhaps it was more of an 80s-90s thing.

Any way, where is this "crushing a player" coming from? I never said anything other than Gretzky and Mario simply didn't play much defense. Not sure how much you saw of these guys, but its pretty much a fact.

 

[Cursed Lemon]

He influenced generations of players, the younger guys at the elite levels who went on to Junior & Pro copying him, carrying the puck into the oppositions end, playing Defence really like a Rover, usually paired with a Stay-At-Home type Defensive partner. These guys would often get caught deep in the other end, a lot of 2 on 1 or 3 on 1 breaks coming back at ya, full-on breakaways. If the puck squirted loose on an errant pass or whatever, you as the goalie had to be on your feet, an excellent skater & stickhandler to intercept & play it; additionally, angles, playing on top of the crease by in some cases 5' out or more critical, mastering the old Johnny Bower Poke Check beyond effective. Playing the puck & keeping it in motion instead of holding it for a face-off in a scramble. With a rushing defenceman nearby who was more than capable of turning on the jets and peeling off down the ice leaving the opposition flatfooted, a sharp Goalie would "think" offensively (had some serious hockey IQ, saw the entire surface, knew exactly who was where and what they were capable of). Previously everything, the Defencemen & the Goaltenders were taught to think & play exclusively defensively. As a Goalie thereafter you'd range out, play the puck a lot more, a good Goalie in fact quarterbacking whenever the opportunity arose an entire attack with 4 guys transitioning from Defence to Offence. As a Goalie, being Aggressive extremely important when playing with Rushing Defenceman, and that included facing them when they were coming at you.

...And what about breakaways?

 

[NewAgeOutlaw]

No, he was not. Gretzky won scoring titles by as much as 69%. Lemieux won by a maximum of 18%.

Adjusted stats are skewed by rule changes, ice time, powerplay time and other era factors. Level of dominance over peers is a constant. Gretzky dominated the NHL to a much greater extent than Lemieux ever did. Not close at all, really.

Mario wanted to quit in the 90s because he had enough with the "rough stuff" in the game. Could you imagine how much he would have had to put up with in the 70s?

Reading through this thread, these are some very funny posts.
1.) Gretzky had a higher margin of victory in his scoring titles because he never had to outscore late 80's Gretzky or a player the caliber of prime Jagr to win his scoring titles. Do you think it is coincidence that the Great One never won a scoring race by 69% once Mario reached his prime?
2.) Yeah, Mario wanted to "quit" because of how rough the game was. I'm sure it had nothing to do with chronic back pain that he had been suffering from for the better part of a decade.
As far as Mario vs. Orr, can't decide, in my mind it's tough to compare a forward from one era to a defenseman from a different era. Whoever was better, the margin is very small.

 

[Killion]

...And what about breakaways?

What do you mean, "what about breakaways"?... There were a lot more of them.

As a goalie, you had to play up beyond the hash marks, be ready to pick up the puck with your stick if it came ricocheting back while your guys were on offence in the other zone & fire it back in to them, sometimes rag it yourself in allowing them the time to get back on side, play the puck yourself rather than letting someone just come charging in, pick it up, empty space to the net. Rushing Defencemen would carry the puck out so that wouldnt be an option. 95% of the time on a breakaway they'll try & beat you with a slapshot. You can tell what a players going to do by the lie of the puck on their blade & how the guys holding his stick, so youve got to move out & challenge. Generally the proto-typical Rushing Defenceman, even Orr, a bit weak on the deke, not difficult to get your stick on his & make him loose control of the puck, more power shooters, so moving out as their winding up, they either hit you or they shoot wide. Thats on a Breakaway. Not talking about being hemmed into your own zone.

The development of goaltending, the style in which its played is in reaction to the way the games played out front. From the Floppers & Acrobats of the 50's & early 60's, to the Standup of the late 60's through the mid to late 80's, to the Hybrids to the Butterfly. As the game itself has evolved, so too Goaltending. The rise of the Slapshot in the early to mid 60's along with Orrs arrival with mobile Defenceman either entering the attack zone or leading the charge altered the way the game was played, and Bobby Orr was in large part responsible for that, thus, he changed the way the game was played, and changed the way Goaltending had been played. Jacques Plante (wanderer, stand-up even then but more hybrid) & Doug Harvey (the fore-runner to Orr) in Montreal in the 50's giving us a hint, a taste of what was to come.

 

[Rhiessan71]

I thought AO won the Hart this year?

Huh?

The subjectivity of the "value" of awards over time is extremely debatable here.

Much like Clarke's two Hart's when Orr had full seasons.

A type of "double counting" then takes place.

Context is extremely important but let's not overstate things here either.

I wasn't overstating anything, I was arguing against the idea that there should be some set value of a Norris to a Hart and that that is quite impossible as every Hart carries a unique weight, same with each Norris.

 

[Irato99]

Marcel Dionne had 10 shorties in 74-75.

Perhaps it was more of an 80s-90s thing.

Any way, where is this "crushing a player" coming from? I never said anything other than Gretzky and Mario simply didn't play much defense. Not sure how much you saw of these guys, but its pretty much a fact.

How can you not play defense on the PK, as I said to have scoring chances in this situation it has to start with a turnover, a broken play, a forced mistake. Maybe we just don't have the same definition of defense.

 

[BraveCanadian]

How can you not play defense on the PK, as I said to have scoring chances in this situation it has to start with a turnover, a broken play, a forced mistake. Maybe we just don't have the same definition of defense.

I'd love to know this as well.

Just because you are placing the threat of a counter attack on the powerplay doesn't mean they are automatically going to let you.

 

[Hardyvan123]

Huh?



I wasn't overstating anything, I was arguing against the idea that there should be some set value of a Norris to a Hart and that that is quite impossible as every Hart carries a unique weight, same with each Norris.

You implied that Ray should have won a Hart, in 90 and that he was 2nd to Wayne in 87. (which was a really weak year for the Hart trophy BTW, since you want to talk about value here).

Even in 90, can you honestly say that the voting difference between Ray and Yzerman is a fair indication of their value that year?

More often than not players get Harts or the close to getting them because of not only what they did but how the filed was that year as well. Pronger's Hart and Lidstrom's Hart voting the following year is a prime example of this.

Back to the thread though, it would be very interesting to see how many Hart's both Bobby and Mario would have gained if healthy for 15ish years or if the voters would have done some crazy stuff.

 

[Hardyvan123]

How can you not play defense on the PK, as I said to have scoring chances in this situation it has to start with a turnover, a broken play, a forced mistake. Maybe we just don't have the same definition of defense.

Defense implies checking or stopping the opposition from scoring as being the primary focus.

It's a stretch of the definition that either Wayne or Mario were "defensive players" in any use of the term.

It's the equivalent of calling Marty Broduer and "offensive player" because of his puck handling abilities.

 

[Irato99]

Defense implies checking or stopping the opposition from scoring as being the primary focus.

It's a stretch of the definition that either Wayne or Mario were "defensive players" in any use of the term.

It's the equivalent of calling Marty Broduer and "offensive player" because of his puck handling abilities.

Anyway I guess to this point it's just just a question of interpretation and it's getting away from the big picture. In retrospect the most important thing is, whatever the style of play, at what level is a player valuable to a team.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Defense implies checking or stopping the opposition from scoring as being the primary focus.

It's a stretch of the definition that either Wayne or Mario were "defensive players" in any use of the term.

It's the equivalent of calling Marty Broduer and "offensive player" because of his puck handling abilities.

Offence and defence are connected in the same fashion as exhaling and inhaling. They go together. There is no primary focus. Taking faceoffs is the same skill regardless of the zone or situation so obviously the focus issue does not exist for faceoffs. Players focus equally for all faceoffs.

Wayne Gretzky and Mario Lemieux are recognized for their talents in the offensive zone. This overlooks their defensive skills in the offensive zone. Both had the ability to hold the puck longer waiting for the exact moment to execute. Why did they hold the puck so long? Answer is very basic, they recognized the defensive liabilities of moving the puck earlier. Again you cannot separate offence and defence according to focus in such situations.

Neutral zone / defensive zone. On the puck both were very hard to beat one on one. Away from the puck both had the ability to go where the puck was going to be. This ability is evidenced in the high SH goal totals for each. Two issues remain about both in the defensive zone. The team defenses used - both were suited to non-traditional defenses - one forward(preferably) a center responsible for the two points. Protecting the downside. No point in taking the risks involved in blocking shots or having them trapped out of the play.

 

[Pominville Knows]

Well. Orr was worse of a defensive player than Lemieux was an offensive one. However, Orr was to a higher degree a better offensive one than Lemieux was a defensive one.