Orr vs. Lemieux for 20 Healthy Seasons?

[Killer Orcas]

It's not THAT clear-cut

- I suspect Lemieux would age a little better than Orr, due to being less reliant on speed, all the while not being slow either
- Lemieux played his career in a somewhat stronger NHL than Orr (as a whole).

I think it's Orr. But it's not completely obvious.

Maybe not THAT clear-cut but I'm still taking Orr. Again from what I read as was a toddler during Orr's Cups he changed the game as played by a D-man. His talent was surreal and he was just as good defensively as offensively. That's a unicorn in my eyes. Again though as earlier said no wrong answer here I probably should have not said slam dunk but I just like Orr that much.

 

[bobholly39]

Jagr did have a great peak from 1994-2001, and it was magical. However, Jagr was noticeably behind Gretzky, and Lemieux. In fact, one can make the argument that Esposito (1968-75), Howe (1950-63), Lafleur (1974-80), Dionne (1974-85), Bossy (1978-86), Orr (1969-75), Mikita (1963-69), and now McDavid (2016-P) all had as good or even better peaks.

More cherry-picking by the pro Jagr contingent.

Are any of you over the age of 40, when one could actually appreciate just how dominant a healthy Lemieux was between his second season of 1985-86 to his first retirement in 1997? Implying Jagr was just as good, if not better from 1997 onwards, is factually incorrect.

What's next? People arguing that Ray Bourque was Bobby Orr's equal?

I don't think there's any "pro Jagr contigent" here lol.

Jagr, offensively, peaked higher than almost anyone in hockey history. He won 5 art rosses, and some really good ones at that.

Jagr is absolutely not touching peak Lemieux, nor even prime Lemieux, but post-prime Lemieux? Everyone slows down eventually. With additional mileage on his body - Lemieux would slow down eventually. It doesn't mean Jagr is better than Lemieux - just that he'd be younger.

As for your first message - Howe peaked higher than Jagr (his peak is 51-54, not 50-63...). McDavid too I think, and Espo is close. Definitely no on Dionne, Mikita and Bossy. Lafleur maybe if you include playoffs, but not for regular season.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

It seems like sometimes we forget Orr was a defenseman.

He led the league in scoring twice, came in 2nd three times and third once. As a defenseman. And he was very good defensively.

Orr also led the league in plus/minus 6 out of 7 seasons. Only Larry Robinson has a better career plus/minus, but he only led the league once. Mario led the league once. He played little to no defense.

 

[jigglysquishy]

Orr was the amongst the best defensive defensemen in the league from 1969 until his knee injury in 1972. If we give him perfect health, he likely keeps that elite shutdown play throughout his career. And keeps his otherworldly offense too.

While his relative offense may decline in the 1980-1987 time period, the high scoring means the raw numbers likely stay flat.

I mean, we could legitimately be looking at 15 Norris Trophies.

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

Orr was the amongst the best defensive defensemen in the league from 1969 until his knee injury in 1972. If we give him perfect health, he likely keeps that elite shutdown play throughout his career. And keeps his otherworldly offense too.

While his relative offense may decline in the 1980-1987 time period, the high scoring means the raw numbers likely stay flat.

I mean, we could legitimately be looking at 15 Norris Trophies.

I gotta wonder too, does a 20 year healthy Orr make Potvin into another Brad Park...always the bridesmaid

 

[Video Nasty]

Why is Lemieux given so much slack when it comes to the back stuff? Simply stretching more and practicing better conditioning would have alleviated and in some cases prevented so many of his issues. That was something within his control and he couldn’t be bothered to do something about it because he was susceptible to relying solely on his supreme talent. Yet his story is told as instead having bad luck and being plagued with factors outside of his control.

March 4, 1990 LA Times article:

“This back thing has been going on for two, three years and everybody has been aware of it. I think some people think this is just another one of his ordeals. That it was nothing serious. But there were times when his lower back really caused him pain and discomfort and he played with it. But a herniated disk is a different circumstance. He didn’t have that before.”


As any of the Whalers will tell you, McKenney is a most insistent man. Before he came from Pittsburgh with General Manager Ed Johnston, he used to be on Lemieux all the time to stretch the muscles in his trunk to prevent injury. Even McKenney could not keep Lemieux locked into his regimen, so one could imagine how it was after he left.

“Mario always had some back discomfort,” McKenney said. “The main gist of what we could gather from physician, trainer and conditioning coach discussing it was that he had a lack of flexibility in the lower back and hamstrings. Every time we took the approach of trying to lengthen that muscle and stretch it, we really got some decent results. He has shortening of those muscles and that’s what created that problem. It’s not genetic.

“The exercises they are doing now with the herniated disk are the same sort we were doing to prevent it initially. I don’t think there’s any doubt he’s going to need an operation. What they’re doing now is trying to alleviate some of the bad pain he’s having and hope it will let him be involved in the playoffs. My personal opinion is that they’re prolonging the obvious: surgery.”

Give me a healthy Lemieux with Gretzky’s motivation and drive and then we might have the greatest player to ever lace them up.

 

[Run the Gauntlet]

I will go with Lemieux.
Orr was playing against street hockey goalies.
Lemieux proved himself against goalies with modern training, Hasek, Brodeur, Fuhr and so on.
Even the lesser goalies of the late 90's and early 2000 were much better than those scarecrows that went up against Orr.

 

[BraveCanadian]

Always amazes me how goalies got good in the NHL the instant Lemieux showed up. What a coincidence.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Always amazes me how goalies got good in the NHL the instant Lemieux showed up. What a coincidence.

And those goalies were still allowing a lot more goals than the "street hockey goalies" Orr played against.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Yeah, 1984 goalies were better than 1967 goalies in this episode of "I have never bothered to look into this: the series"

 

[JackSlater]

I'd comfortably go with Orr because I put more value on what he could bring over those 20 years. No slight to Lemieux, just a small but clear edge for Orr in my eyes. Healthy Orr was probably the best player in the NHL by his second season and by his fourth we already saw him reach probably the best peak ever. Severely hobbled Orr was still elite at the 1976 Canada Cup and when he managed to play for Chicago, and that's a clearly worse player than I imagine a fully healthy Orr would have been by 1986. Lemieux's not that far off either - probably never had a full peak due to health but came close enough, was probably the best non-Gretzky player by his second season and was still the best offensive player in hockey, accumulated injuries and all, in 2004.

Defencemen tend to age better than forwards but with Lemieux's size, something unaffected by age, I'd consider it a wash. I prefer that healthy Orr can provide elite defence basically throughout his career while being the best/second best offensive player in the sport, and I'm not sure of Lemieux's drive being consistent over 20 years.

 

[Gorskyontario]

I will go with Lemieux.
Orr was playing against street hockey goalies.
Lemieux proved himself against goalies with modern training, Hasek, Brodeur, Fuhr and so on.
Even the lesser goalies of the late 90's and early 2000 were much better than those scarecrows that went up against Orr.

Goalies were worse on average in the late 80s then in the late 60's, early 70's. What on earth are you talking about? This can be easily verified by checking goals per game averages.

 

[The Panther]

I will go with Lemieux.
Orr was playing against street hockey goalies.

Is this really relevant when Orr's main job was playing defence, at which he was rather good?

 

[TheStatican]

Slight correction: Lemieux came out of retirement and dominated... for 43 games.

Might want to fact check that;

NHL Stats

The official source for NHL Stats including skaters, goalies, teams stats and more.

www.nhl.com

That's a 35 to 37 year old Lemieux still having clear separation over everyone in the league over nearly a two year sample size.

1989-90: They're even

Saying Lemieux and Gretzky were even in the 89-90 is like saying Connor McDavid & Jonathan Huberdeau were even in 22-23;

​	GPG​	PPG​
Lemieux​	0.76​	2.08​
Gretzky​	0.55​	1.95​
Advantage for Lemieux by:​	+38%​	+7%​
McDavid​	0.55​	1.54​
Huberdeau​	0.38​	1.44​
Advantage for McDavid by:​	+45%​	+7%​

and was a better goal scorer per game than Lemieux.

Oh so NOW someone being the better goal scorer suddenly matters?

And again, good health doesn't mean your body doesn't get worn down. There's a toll paid on the body by being healthy and playing game after game, year after year, and not sitting out back-to-backs.

Lemieux sat out a grand total of a dozen back to back games from 1995-97. I'm sure having to play in those 12 extra games would made a profound difference to a healthy Lemieux.

 

[MadLuke]

Goalies were worse on average in the late 80s then in the late 60's, early 70's. What on earth are you talking about? This can be easily verified by checking goals per game averages.

This is not that easy, unless we belive goaltender got much worst the last 10 years and peaked in 2003-2004.

Considering everyone in Orr league faced the same goaltender (outside the Bruins one) and same for Lemieux, outside playing a style that work particularly well against good goaltender relative to your peers or vice versa I am not fully certain of the point being advanced here.

Lemieux leave virtually no doubt he would have done perfectly fine against any goaltender style-strenght, and a playmaker like Orr... how would it be an issue ?

 

[Albatros]

There's no universe in which Orr plays as reckless as he did and stays healthy for 20 years.

 

[The Panther]

Might want to fact check that;

NHL Stats

The official source for NHL Stats including skaters, goalies, teams stats and more.

www.nhl.com

That's a 35 to 37 year old Lemieux still having clear separation over everyone in the league over nearly a two year sample size.


Saying Lemieux and Gretzky were even in the 89-90 is like saying Connor McDavid & Jonathan Huberdeau were even in 22-23;

​	GPG​	PPG​
Lemieux​	0.76​	2.08​
Gretzky​	0.55​	1.95​
Advantage for Lemieux by:​	+38%​	+7%​
McDavid​	0.55​	1.54​
Huberdeau​	0.38​	1.44​
Advantage for McDavid by:​	+45%​	+7%​

Good grief, man.

As I already showed, in 1989-90 Gretzky led the NHL in scoring at the end of October, at the end of November, and at the end of December. After 51 games played apiece, he and Lemieux were tied for 1st in scoring. So, yeah, not exactly like Huberdeau and McDavid -- a ridiculous assertion which you should be ashamed of yourself for making.

After his late winter mini-slump that lasted 9 games or so, Wayne had 34 points in 15 games into the latter part of March when he got injured with a pretty severe back injury. If he had maintained that scoring level for the final 8 complete games (which is extremely likely, as it was below his career average), he'd have finished the season with 159 points. Lemieux paced for 167 overall, and he only reaches that 'pace' after a 23 points-in-9 games push before his back seized up, which means his per-game average is likely overstated by projecting him to 167 points. But even so, we're looking at, if both players were healthy, Lemieux scoring around 165-170 points (minus player) and Gretzky 160 (plus player).

Why is it so unGodly hard you to admit that Gretzky and Lemieux were very even in 1989-90 and 1990-91? Does it unsettle your Lemieux-superiority narrative unjustly?

 

[bobholly39]

Good grief, man.

As I already showed, in 1989-90 Gretzky led the NHL in scoring at the end of October, at the end of November, and at the end of December. After 51 games played apiece, he and Lemieux were tied for 1st in scoring. So, yeah, not exactly like Huberdeau and McDavid -- a ridiculous assertion which you should be ashamed of yourself for making.

After his late winter mini-slump that lasted 9 games or so, Wayne had 34 points in 15 games into the latter part of March when he got injured with a pretty severe back injury. If he had maintained that scoring level for the final 8 complete games (which is extremely likely, as it was below his career average), he'd have finished the season with 159 points. Lemieux paced for 167 overall, and he only reaches that 'pace' after a 23 points-in-9 games push before his back seized up, which means his per-game average is likely overstated by projecting him to 167 points. But even so, we're looking at, if both players were healthy, Lemieux scoring around 165-170 points (minus player) and Gretzky 160 (plus player).

Why is it so unGodly hard you to admit that Gretzky and Lemieux were very even in 1989-90 and 1990-91? Does it unsettle your Lemieux-superiority narrative unjustly?

He wasn't healthy.

Premise of this thread "healthy Lemieux".

 

[overpass]

There's no universe in which Orr plays as reckless as he did and stays healthy for 20 years.

Yeah, a 20 year healthy career is unlikely for anyone and maybe for Orr in particular. I'm pretty sure I've read here that Orr's skating stride and the way he used his edges was particularly hard on his knees.

The Bruins asked Eddie Shore to go to Oshawa to give his opinion on Orr when Orr was 14-15. Shore reported back that Orr would be a great player, but his knees wouldn't last more than 10 years because his knees went too far forward in his skating stride.

 

[PrimumHockeyist]

I'd comfortably go with Orr because I put more value on what he could bring over those 20 years. No slight to Lemieux, just a small but clear edge for Orr in my eyes. Healthy Orr was probably the best player in the NHL by his second season and by his fourth we already saw him reach probably the best peak ever. Severely hobbled Orr was still elite at the 1976 Canada Cup and when he managed to play for Chicago, and that's a clearly worse player than I imagine a fully healthy Orr would have been by 1986. Lemieux's not that far off either - probably never had a full peak due to health but came close enough, was probably the best non-Gretzky player by his second season and was still the best offensive player in hockey, accumulated injuries and all, in 2004.

Defencemen tend to age better than forwards but with Lemieux's size, something unaffected by age, I'd consider it a wash. I prefer that healthy Orr can provide elite defence basically throughout his career while being the best/second best offensive player in the sport, and I'm not sure of Lemieux's drive being consistent over 20 years.

I would have to give the edge to Orr on this account, if I follow you correctly. Orr seemed like the more consistently hungry player. Pen fans would know better but I do recall people saying that Mario was a slacker in his earliest years. I doubt that personally, but hungry Mario was a very different cat than the other versions of him that I recall. I see Orr as always hungry,

Clearly, not enough posters saw Orr play to make for a quality comparison.

Highlights are not enough to tell the whole story. It's what we all saw between the highlights so consistently. The way he skated around people is also impossible to ignore, and for those who ate up NHL hockey in the early 70s, McD evokes strong Orr-like memories this way, more than any player I can think of these last 50 years.

There's no universe in which Orr plays as reckless as he did and stays healthy for 20 years.

True, except in the parallel universe that is this thread.

 

[PrimumHockeyist]

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. ...

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?

I'm thinking that the OP means that the trades you mention must happen. The deeper the dives here, the more it seems like Orr's and Lemieux's supporting casts may be more important in these players' quality in later years.

(Don't get me started, but Orr's performance in 76 reminds me a lot of Phil's in 72. Did he out-Phil Phil72? I've often wondered about Game One in 72. Do the Russians get a gimme because we didn't respect (scout) them enough? Or, does Orr start taking over at some point? The second period always interested me that way. TC looked kind of lost as I recall. Orr might have been able to break that pattern by doing his skating in circles thing. I wonder if the game can be broken down to see where Orr might have made a difference in that first game, in specific instances. )

 

[wetcoast]

Yeah I suspect Orr is the type of player who would age quite well. But - we didn't see it. It's always unpredictable to guess at ageing, so it's possible it could be worst than imagined.

We saw Lemieux older still super elite, so it's at least somewhat more reliable, vs pure guesswork.

Sure if we are just looking at points but as for overall impact it's Orr and by quite a bit.

Orr simply tilted the ice out there 5 on 5 and his ESGF/ESGA and Ron Roff numbers reflect that his impact was far greater than Mario who in some ways is like the best forward version of EK65 and Orr's team mate Phil Esposito.

Alot of goals are going to happen, for both teams when they are on the ice.

Bobby Orr just kills Mario here even if you want to adjust for team.

 

[wetcoast]

Always amazes me how goalies got good in the NHL the instant Lemieux showed up. What a coincidence.

GAA was trending down, Save % and PK trending up during Mario's career must have been all Mario's fault eh?

NHL League Averages | Hockey-Reference.com

Check out the latest NHL League Averages including shots, saves, goal averages and more on Hockey-Reference.com

www.hockey-reference.com

 

[wetcoast]

Might want to fact check that;

NHL Stats

The official source for NHL Stats including skaters, goalies, teams stats and more.

www.nhl.com

That's a 35 to 37 year old Lemieux still having clear separation over everyone in the league over nearly a two year sample size.

Still to be fair Mario had by far the highest % of PPP to ESP among top players in the league and no one was seriously mistaking a 35-37 year old Mario as some sort of best player in the league if one wanted to win games right?

Saying Lemieux and Gretzky were even in the 89-90 is like saying Connor McDavid & Jonathan Huberdeau were even in 22-23;

​	GPG​	PPG​
Lemieux​	0.76​	2.08​
Gretzky​	0.55​	1.95​
Advantage for Lemieux by:​	+38%​	+7%​
McDavid​	0.55​	1.54​
Huberdeau​	0.38​	1.44​
Advantage for McDavid by:​	+45%​	+7%​

There are lies, damm lies and statistics going on here.

Sure if you want to claim that Mario was better than Gretzky go ahead but don't insult people's intelligence and make your argument seem extremely biased from reality by comparing the gap between Mario and Gretzky anything like McDavid and Huberdeau.

That's a really bad faith argument there worthy of MJ status.

Oh so NOW someone being the better goal scorer suddenly matters?

Lemieux sat out a grand total of a dozen back to back games from 1995-97. I'm sure having to play in those 12 extra games would made a profound difference to a healthy Lemieux.

Now if only we had someone who was super meticulous about stats to look this up?

 

[Gorskyontario]

This is not that easy, unless we belive goaltender got much worst the last 10 years and peaked in 2003-2004.

Considering everyone in Orr league faced the same goaltender (outside the Bruins one) and same for Lemieux, outside playing a style that work particularly well against good goaltender relative to your peers or vice versa I am not fully certain of the point being advanced here.

Lemieux leave virtually no doubt he would have done perfectly fine against any goaltender style-strenght, and a playmaker like Orr... how would it be an issue ?

Obviously there have been times with defensive systems have been emphasized but goalies in the last 10 years have become very garbage.