Orr vs. Lemieux for 20 Healthy Seasons?
- Thread starter WingsFan95
- Start date
BigBadBruins7708
Registered User
Orr, by a lot.
Orr in the early 80s and Orr with Park as his partner is a cheat code. In this scenario Orr and Park play ~7 seasons together
In this scenario you're looking at:
12-15 Norris trophies
4-5 Harts
3 or 4 Cups (at a minimum they win in 79)
4-6 Ross trophies
1,700-1,900 points
- Orr was 27 in his final full season.
- He had 46-89-135, +80 and won the Ross, Norris and Pearson
Orr in the early 80s and Orr with Park as his partner is a cheat code. In this scenario Orr and Park play ~7 seasons together
In this scenario you're looking at:
12-15 Norris trophies
4-5 Harts
3 or 4 Cups (at a minimum they win in 79)
4-6 Ross trophies
1,700-1,900 points
- Orr was 27 in his final full season.
- He had 46-89-135, +80 and won the Ross, Norris and Pearson
Jets4Life
Registered User
Lemisux. By 1989, he was better than Gretzky, and would have been the best in the world until 2002.
Fatass
Registered User
- Apr 17, 2017
- 22,127
- 14,050
Yup. Orr was pretty much on one leg for the last few seasons of his career and missed out on his prime years for a D. Orr was not only the best offensive D he was the best defensive D too. And he was the best player by a lot. Like Gretzky was so much better than the rest. Mario was fabulous too, but not like Orr. Don’t know if we will ever see a guy like him again.
MadLuke
Registered User
- Jan 18, 2011
- 9,554
- 5,190
Feel safer to go with Orr, can play 30 minutes a night in the playoff, does Lemieux keep motivated during DPE, the premise say that he does play them, but does he give them all.
Obviously this is a luxury choice to have to make here.
Obviously this is a luxury choice to have to make here.
Nick Hansen
Registered User
- Sep 28, 2017
- 3,122
- 2,652
Their environment is so utterly different it becomes hard to compare the two. Orr, IMO, in this scenario plays through some of the worst hockey the NHL has seen while Lemieux gets the other end of the stick if you compare. Lots of garbage hockey going on from the expansion 'til the early 80's from what I've seen.
No one really takes this into account. Sure Orr was the more dominant player overall but that dominance takes a hit if he plays in the late 80s and 90s. I don’t really think there’s a wrong answer here. Technically Orr is the best player ever on a relative basis and Lemieux rivaled Gretzky as an offensive talent. Lemieux with a healthy back and Orr with healthy knees would’ve given Gretzky a run for his money for greatest ever.
The Panther
Registered User
In 1989-90 and 1990-91 combined, Gretzky outscored Lemieux.
However, from mid-1991 to spring 1996, Lemieux was indisputably the best player in the world (5 years).
Was Lemieux the best player in 1996-97? Probably, but by now Jagr is a better goal-scorer, is beating Lemieux in ES scoring, and is matching him in point production.
I guess if both were playing, Jagr replaces Lemieux as the league's best player from 1997-98. (Head to head in 2000-01, Jagr outscored Lemieux.)
Lemieux was not the best player in 2001-02.
The answer to the thread question is, of course, it depends on what your team needs.
MadLuke
Registered User
- Jan 18, 2011
- 9,554
- 5,190
He was far from the magic healthy theoretical Lemieux being talked about, without back problems, it is not crazy to imagine that Gretzky do not outscore Lemieux.
For the post 1993... could see either way the healthy never take a break, maybe he continues to be the best even in 1996-1997 and later, instead of kind of falling back behind the Jagr-Forsberg-Lindros-Hasek or maybe he burn out a bit like Jagr before lemieux return in 2000-2001 and Washington years and maybe he does before 1996.
Did he had the mental "toughness", always self-motivating to be Hart winner level 10 years in a row like a Gretzky if the body allows it.. maybe obviously, the guy went back from Cancer treatment and dominated to win the Ross, had some of the best Smythe run not able to lace his skates, maybe without that extra weight he just goes on. Maybe the hockey of the DPE depress him, maybe his team stay a run&gun like they were and he love it and keep at it.
Jets4Life
Registered User
That may ahve something to do with Lemieux missing out on 1/2 of the games. You are not even following the thread. It has everything to do with "what if" Orr and lemieux were healthy throughout their careers. From the 1988-89 season, Lemieux was superior to Gretzky in PPG for the remainder of Gretzky's career.
Lemieux was better than Gretzky from 1988-89 onwards. If Lemieux had not retired initially in 1997, he would have certainly put up superior numbers to Gretzky from 1997-99. Just look at Lemieux's numbers from December 2000 until the end of the 2000-01 season. He would have easily won the Art Ross, if he had comeback in october.
Lemieux was far better than Jagr in 1996-97. It could be said that if Lemieux was healthy enough, he would have been better than Jagr right up until the lockout season.
Not even close. Lemieux had superior PPG in 1996-97 and in 2000-01, 2001-02, and 2002-03.
It was easy for jagr to outscore Lemieux in 2000-01, considering Jagr played twice as many games as him.
PS...Pens record before lemieux 2000-01return; 15-14-6-1
Pens record after Lemieux 2000-01 return: 27-14-3-2
Last edited:
- Jan 22, 2007
- 14,424
- 7,148
Both would have eye-popping careers that rival, or potentially surpass, Gretzky as the GOAT. Mario in 92-93 was scoring at Gretz' 215 point level. If he stays healthy for another 11 years, he absolutely torches the league offensively, stacks his trophy case, and likely ends up the greatest offensive machine in history. I wholeheartedly believe that a healthy Mario ages better than Gretzky and produces at a higher level in his last 3-4 seasons than Gretz did.
That said, what Orr would/could have done would have supplanted Lemieux (and Gretzky) as the all-time greatest hockey player. Heck, some very astute hockey people already believe Bobby was the GOAT today. If Orr stays healthy for 20 years, he easily ends up with 14 Norris trophies, a couple more Art Ross trophies, a few more Harts, more Cups, and scores close to 2,000 points. That would be an untouchable resume.
That said, what Orr would/could have done would have supplanted Lemieux (and Gretzky) as the all-time greatest hockey player. Heck, some very astute hockey people already believe Bobby was the GOAT today. If Orr stays healthy for 20 years, he easily ends up with 14 Norris trophies, a couple more Art Ross trophies, a few more Harts, more Cups, and scores close to 2,000 points. That would be an untouchable resume.
WingsFan95
Registered User
I personally think Orr wins a few more Cups. It would be interesting seeing the Bruins war with the Islanders.
And LOL at Jagr surpassing Lemieux in any way, in this scenario Lemieux would undoubtedly gain more experience with his health so I don't see how he's taking a backseat to Jagr until maybe the last few seasons. He could have become a McDavid with 100 assists and Jagr scoring 60+ though. Which even in DPE would be possible at the top end.
And LOL at Jagr surpassing Lemieux in any way, in this scenario Lemieux would undoubtedly gain more experience with his health so I don't see how he's taking a backseat to Jagr until maybe the last few seasons. He could have become a McDavid with 100 assists and Jagr scoring 60+ though. Which even in DPE would be possible at the top end.
- Jan 22, 2007
- 14,424
- 7,148
Agreed. In this scenario, even as Lemieux aged and JJ was at his best, Mario would be feasting on Jagr's skill. Twilight Mario would be scoring 100+ in his sleep playing with a high-end talent like Jagr, Kovalev, Straka, etc. And, of course we need to imagine that the Pens would be a contender until Lemieux hangs them up, so they would be luring even more talent.
In those two seasons Mario Lemieux played 59 and 26 regular season games respectively. Your post makes close to zero sense given the context of this thread.
MadLuke
Registered User
- Jan 18, 2011
- 9,554
- 5,190
By head to head in 2001, he probably meant than when both were in the league that season, Jagr scored more points.
The Panther
Registered User
Except in 1989-90 and 1990-91 combined, as I said:
2.02 PPG Gretzky (+38)
1.98 PPG Lemieux (-10)
There is no doubt that Lemieux would have put up superior numbers to old-Gretzky from 1997 to 1999. Did I dispute this anywhere...?
Lemieux's 2001 numbers are, of course, superhumanly impressive... but it's only 43 games and he was outscored by his teammate during those games.
Head to head, Jagr outscored him in 2000-01.
Okay, but Jagr was already outproducing Lemieux at ES in 1996-97 and he hadn't even reached his peak yet. Lemieux was getting older and slowing down.
Head to head in 2001, Jagr outscored Lemieux. In 2002, Jagr with Washington had a higher PPG than Lemieux.
Jagr scored 127 points (on a 242-goal scoring club) in 1999. Lemieux (helped by Jagr) scored 122 points on a (285-goal club) in 1997. In a hypothetical scenario in 1999, is it really likely that a 33-year-old Lemieux, with the wear-and-tear of consecutive seasons for 14 years, outscores peak Jagr? I don't see it. He barely did it in 1997 and couldn't do it in 2001.
Wrong, it was very, very close:
1997 PPG:
1.605 Lemieux
1.508 Jagr
1997 ES PPG:
1.039 Lemieux
1.063 Jagr
Head to head in 2000-01, Jagr had a higher PPG than Lemieux.
Also:
1997-98 to 2002-03 PPG (Lemieux appears in only 134 games):
1.48 Lemieux (-10)
1.35 Jagr (+83)
It's a 10 points per season advantage to Lemieux by pace over these six seasons, but that's with Mario mostly resting, Jagr with no time off and with two Washington seasons.
As demonstrated, I was talking about points per game (PPG), not overall points.
Jets4Life
Registered User
OK, 1988-1990 then. Gretzky had a slightly higher PPG when Lemieux only played in 25 games during the 1990-91 season, when he was struggling with getting back into shape.
You are the only person I know trying to state that Jagr would ahve been better than a healthy Lemieux from 1997 and beyond. Again, you fail to understand the whole point of the thread. It's about the hypothetical scenario if Lemieux was healthy. The thread title seems lost on you.
Of course Jagr finished with more points than Lemieux in his comback season, considered he played double the games. If Lemieux played in the same number of games as jagr in 2000-01, Lemieux would have outpaced him by 25+ points.
2001-02 PPG:
Lemieux 1.29
Jagr 1.14
[/QUOTE]
The whole thread is assuming Lemieux and Orr were healthy, and played full seasons into their late 30s. For some reason, you fail to comprehend this. Of course Jagr is going to have more points than Lemieux, considering Jagr was playing full seasons, while Lemieux only ended up playing one season (2002-03) where he played in over 2/3 of the games.
PPG in 2000-01;
Lemieux: 1.77
Jagr: 1.49
With the exception of 2003-04, and 2005-06 (where Lemieux played 36 games in total), he had a higher PPG average in every single season than Jagr, from 1990-2003.
Last edited:
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
Clearly, not enough posters saw Orr play to make for a quality comparison.
OP technically didn't ask a question. If the question is "which do you take", i'd take Lemieux because I love gaudy offensive numbers and I'd be most curious to see how Lemieux does vs Gretzky in this hypothetical, and even vs himself, ie how high he can go # wise.
Orr....is a lot less fun. In fact, he's kind of a buzz kill. He'd be playing during all of the Habs, Islanders & Oilers dynasties....does he mess any of them up? They're 3 extremely prestigious and awesome dynasties in hockey history, possibly 3 of the best ever - and peak Orr is capable of messing up at least 1 or 2.
But if you're asking...if this hypothetical played itself out - who ends up with the better career? I'd possibly lean Orr. But a few important caveats:
1. Does Lemieux have 100% perfect health? Or simply "no major injuries". If it's "no major injuries", but still isn't 100% with his back all the time...Orr gets the better career. If Lemieux gets actual perfect health...he might give Orr/Gretzky a run for their money at #1 all-time.
2. We never saw Orr later in age. We saw bits and pieces of Lemieux, so we know with perfect health he has the potantial to age very well. Orr....might age amazing too, or he might fall off a cliff in play. Maybe his speed goes away? It's harder to fathom him.
Orr....is a lot less fun. In fact, he's kind of a buzz kill. He'd be playing during all of the Habs, Islanders & Oilers dynasties....does he mess any of them up? They're 3 extremely prestigious and awesome dynasties in hockey history, possibly 3 of the best ever - and peak Orr is capable of messing up at least 1 or 2.
But if you're asking...if this hypothetical played itself out - who ends up with the better career? I'd possibly lean Orr. But a few important caveats:
1. Does Lemieux have 100% perfect health? Or simply "no major injuries". If it's "no major injuries", but still isn't 100% with his back all the time...Orr gets the better career. If Lemieux gets actual perfect health...he might give Orr/Gretzky a run for their money at #1 all-time.
2. We never saw Orr later in age. We saw bits and pieces of Lemieux, so we know with perfect health he has the potantial to age very well. Orr....might age amazing too, or he might fall off a cliff in play. Maybe his speed goes away? It's harder to fathom him.
Your entire post essentially makes zero sense. Mario Lemieux was not healthy at all during these seasons. Yet you're using this as an example of Gretzky being able to outscore him during this period?
I am absolutely completely confused by whatever point you're attempting to make.
jigglysquishy
Registered User
Assuming a perfectly healthy Orr, the butterfly effect is pretty insane. As it was, we got a reduced Orr in 1972-73 through 1974-75. And that was basically it.
If he's perfectly healthy, he plays in the 1972 Summit Series. As the best player in the world and the best skater in the world, he's likely in a tier of his own in the tournament. Instead of Canada squeaking out a close victory, they likely roll over the Soviets. The important lessons Canada learned are instead ignored. The type of play of the WHA Jets or NHL Oilers never comes to fruition.
He is even more dominant in the 1976 Canada Cup. What is the state of international hockey after that? Canada posts two dominant victories and treats the Soviets as a second class hockey nation. Does Canada just maintain a north south style until the mid 80s when the Soviets force their hands?
If Orr is healthy they never get Brad Park. They don't trade Esposito at the same timeframe. And the Bruins never get Bourque.
What's the butterfly effect of Bourque ending up in LA or Toronto or Chicago?
If he's perfectly healthy, he plays in the 1972 Summit Series. As the best player in the world and the best skater in the world, he's likely in a tier of his own in the tournament. Instead of Canada squeaking out a close victory, they likely roll over the Soviets. The important lessons Canada learned are instead ignored. The type of play of the WHA Jets or NHL Oilers never comes to fruition.
He is even more dominant in the 1976 Canada Cup. What is the state of international hockey after that? Canada posts two dominant victories and treats the Soviets as a second class hockey nation. Does Canada just maintain a north south style until the mid 80s when the Soviets force their hands?
If Orr is healthy they never get Brad Park. They don't trade Esposito at the same timeframe. And the Bruins never get Bourque.
What's the butterfly effect of Bourque ending up in LA or Toronto or Chicago?
If you gave Lemieux perfect health - there's a small chance he would win every single Art Ross trophy from 1988 on. He's so talented, he wouldn't even need to play at his best ~82 games to win...if he plays at ~80-85% of his best it's enough to win almost every year - gives a lot of room for margin and inconsistencies, while still winning a Ross.
1988 & 1989 - already won
1990, 1991, 1994, 1995 - If he had perfect health, he'd win the Ross every year.
1992, 1996, 1997 - already won
That's 9 Art Rosses.
As for 1998, 99, 2000, 2001 & 2002....hard to say how much ageing Lemieux does vs Peak Jagr. Could he beat him out every year? Some years?
I'd say at the least - if we change nothing to Jagr - Lemieux can probably beat Jagr out in 1998 (lower total) and 2000 (63 games).
1999 & 2001 are up for debate who wins. Let's give those to Jagr.
2002 - Lemieux definitely has it in him to beat out Iginla and 96 points. He might be 36 then, but if he was healthy he'd still win it in a lowering scoring year for forwards.
So total for Lemieux = 12 Art Ross....but could be even higher.
Gretzky goes down to 8 Art Rosses (loses out 90, 91 & 94).
As for peak numbers for Lemieux in a season:
- He's not touching 163 assists, obviouslly. He might flirt with ~110-120 assists a few more times though.
- He'd have a good shot to make a run at 92 goals. In 1992-1993 is the obvious choice, but possibly in surrounding years too. He'd similarly have a good shot to make a run at 215 points, also either in 1992-1993 or in surrounding years. Whether he surpasses 92 goals or 215 points is 50/50 I'd say.
Where it gets really interresting is playoffs. The 90s had some incredibly deep teams who won cups. Rangers, Devils, Stars, Colorado, Detroit....does Lemieux being healthy and playing throughout the 90s change anything? It's possible - but much harder to pinpoint. Maybe he and Jagr bring an extra cup or two, maybe none...who knows. Lemieux would almost for sure have a lot more playoff games and points though.
All-time playoff point leaders:
Gretzky 382
Messier 295
Kurri 233
Lemieux today....172 points in 107 games. To me he'd 100% be above Kurri - and possibly above Messier (really depends on games played). But he definitely wouldn't touch Gretzky here.
In this scenario does Lemieux surpass Gretzky all-time? It's a 1A/1B situation. Gretzky remains the better playoff performer - and likely has more career points/assists. Lemieux is close on career points - and above 1000 career goals.
1988 & 1989 - already won
1990, 1991, 1994, 1995 - If he had perfect health, he'd win the Ross every year.
1992, 1996, 1997 - already won
That's 9 Art Rosses.
As for 1998, 99, 2000, 2001 & 2002....hard to say how much ageing Lemieux does vs Peak Jagr. Could he beat him out every year? Some years?
I'd say at the least - if we change nothing to Jagr - Lemieux can probably beat Jagr out in 1998 (lower total) and 2000 (63 games).
1999 & 2001 are up for debate who wins. Let's give those to Jagr.
2002 - Lemieux definitely has it in him to beat out Iginla and 96 points. He might be 36 then, but if he was healthy he'd still win it in a lowering scoring year for forwards.
So total for Lemieux = 12 Art Ross....but could be even higher.
Gretzky goes down to 8 Art Rosses (loses out 90, 91 & 94).
As for peak numbers for Lemieux in a season:
- He's not touching 163 assists, obviouslly. He might flirt with ~110-120 assists a few more times though.
- He'd have a good shot to make a run at 92 goals. In 1992-1993 is the obvious choice, but possibly in surrounding years too. He'd similarly have a good shot to make a run at 215 points, also either in 1992-1993 or in surrounding years. Whether he surpasses 92 goals or 215 points is 50/50 I'd say.
Where it gets really interresting is playoffs. The 90s had some incredibly deep teams who won cups. Rangers, Devils, Stars, Colorado, Detroit....does Lemieux being healthy and playing throughout the 90s change anything? It's possible - but much harder to pinpoint. Maybe he and Jagr bring an extra cup or two, maybe none...who knows. Lemieux would almost for sure have a lot more playoff games and points though.
All-time playoff point leaders:
Gretzky 382
Messier 295
Kurri 233
Lemieux today....172 points in 107 games. To me he'd 100% be above Kurri - and possibly above Messier (really depends on games played). But he definitely wouldn't touch Gretzky here.
In this scenario does Lemieux surpass Gretzky all-time? It's a 1A/1B situation. Gretzky remains the better playoff performer - and likely has more career points/assists. Lemieux is close on career points - and above 1000 career goals.
There's so much more "butterfly" effect for Orr than for Lemieux I think. You didn't even mention the 3 dynasties (Habs, Islanders and Oilers) and how a healthy Orr might affect those, if he helps Boston pierce through a few years.
One thing I'll say about the 1972 and 1976 international tournaments - Orr, as good as he was, isn't without disappointing playoff performances. Gretzky is more bullet-proof in that regards (especially peak Gretzky with Oilers). So maybe Orr does as well as you suggest in 1972 and 1976, but it's not necessarily a guarantee.
As for Bourque ending up elsewhere....I don't even want to fathom at that. Impossible to say how it changes things - probably doesn't change much for Bourque individually from a career standpoint, but from a team success standpoint, who knows?
BigBadBruins7708
Registered User
I mean, we didnt see Orr age, but we got what you could call a glimpse into it at the 76 Canada Cup. 1 year removed from being able to stay on the ice and with 2 shot knees he put up 9 in 7 winning MVP against the World's best.
Aging is really just adjusting to losing your physical gifts and that is at least evidence that he could've excelled at it
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
GAME 5 - Pelicans Lahti @ Tappara Tampere - Tappara leads series 3-1Wagers: 2Staked: $1,359.00Event closes- Updated:
-
-
-