Orr vs. Lemieux for 20 Healthy Seasons?

[Dennis Bonvie]

Orr retired at the age where some defensemen blossom into their best forms. Hard to argue with that.

Should note Orr had his first knee surgery in his rookie season.

So he wasn't even completly healthy at his peak.

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

Orr retired at the age where some defensemen blossom into their best forms. Hard to argue with that.

Yup, to put it in perspective the age of Orr's last real season would be the same as Makar retiring after next season.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

No, it was not.

1989-90 scoring race after October
26 PTS - Gretzky
20 PTS - Lemieux
1989-90 scoring race after November
52 PTS - Gretzky
47 PTS - Lemieux
1989-90 scoring race after December
80 - Gretzky
76 - Lemieux
1989-90 scoring race after January
103 - Lemieux
101 - Gretzky

They're basically even at this point. In late January, Gretzky went into a post-All Star game slump after his buddy (Nicholls) was traded, and Mario went on a bit of a heater, but of course the latter was injured and missed most of the remaining games.

Gretzky himself got injured on March 22nd before the end of the season, but just prior to that he'd been on a heater himself (from Feb. 14th to March 17th 1990, Wayne had 34 points in 15 games... then, he got back-crunched and missed the last 7.5 games).

Gretzky was also at his best all through 1990-91, scoring at the same pace as Lemieux in 1989-90, and higher than Lemieux's pace in 1990-91 and 1991-92.

Okay, I'll leave it there as I think I've made my point...

Your post conviently leaves out that Lemieux was playing with a herniated disc one so bad he couldnt tie his own skates. It also leaves out the fact when lemieux was forced out due to said back injury he was in the midst of a 46 game point streak and was 12 points up on Gretzky on feb 14. When one guy is in that much pain n is still outscoring a healthy player.... well yeah ive made my point

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

Considering that mario dominated wayne in 89. Was dominating him in 90 when he was forced out with his back. Then dominated him in 92. Not really a stretch to say he was better in the 90-91 time span

 

[Gorskyontario]

Your post conviently leaves out that Lemieux was playing with a herniated disc one so bad he couldnt tie his own skates. It also leaves out the fact when lemieux was forced out due to said back injury he was in the midst of a 46 game point streak and was 12 points up on Gretzky on feb 14. When one guy is in that much pain n is still outscoring a healthy player.... well yeah ive made my point

Thanks for pointing this out. I'm still super confused as to what @The Panther was trying to say in this thread. I wish he would simply lay out all his points in a clear and concise manner instead of obfuscating the thread's premise.

 

[BraveCanadian]

If somehow they could remain magically healthy then this is Orr - he made a much bigger difference to his teams overall than Lemieux did going one way.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

there’s the joke about how gretzky wasn’t an effective coach because he’d just tell his guys, “hey be awesome” and of course no one else could see what gretzky could see or do what gretzky could do.

and then i think about what gretzky brought to his teams as a captain. everybody works tirelessly to improve themselves because of the greatest player in the world is working that hard and he’s already the greatest player in the world, then they better try to match it.

so thinking about what orr and mario brought to their respective teams, i’d imagine orr had a similarly positive effect on his teammates. as don cherry always use to say, orr was a coach’s dream. in addition to being a magician, he always worked hard, listened to his coach, the opposite of esposito.

and mario, i’d gather, was probably a net negative in terms of a culture of work ethic and sacrificing for the team. but i also imagine him kind of like gretzky the coach. “hey guys, watch me do this and follow along.” but in mario’s case, he did magnificently get the most out of jagr just by being awesome and asking the kid to keep up.

 

[Boxscore]

there’s the joke about how gretzky wasn’t an effective coach because he’d just tell his guys, “hey be awesome” and of course no one else could see what gretzky could see or do what gretzky could do.

and then i think about what gretzky brought to his teams as a captain. everybody works tirelessly to improve themselves because of the greatest player in the world is working that hard and he’s already the greatest player in the world, then they better try to match it.

so thinking about what orr and mario brought to their respective teams, i’d imagine orr had a similarly positive effect on his teammates. as don cherry always use to say, orr was a coach’s dream. in addition to being a magician, he always worked hard, listened to his coach, the opposite of esposito.

and mario, i’d gather, was probably a net negative in terms of a culture of work ethic and sacrificing for the team. but i also imagine him kind of like gretzky the coach. “hey guys, watch me do this and follow along.” but in mario’s case, he did magnificently get the most out of jagr just by being awesome and asking the kid to keep up.

The Pens players talked about Mario like he walked on water. The dude literally couldn't put his carry-on in the top compartment in the plane and had to climb over the boards by lifting his pant leg up. And he never once complained. His teammates respected him beyond belief.

 

[MadLuke]

The Pens players talked about Mario like he walked on water. The dude literally couldn't put his carry-on in the top compartment in the plane and had to climb over the boards by lifting his pant leg up. And he never once complained. His teammates respected him beyond belief.

This would not have happened here too.

That said could be overblown, Jagr with and Jagr post Mario (or once he returned) do not make it look at all like a bad influence, at least not for the offensive forward bunch, did seem like a good leader. Or the 2002-2004 team Canadas...

Now if he has to play all those seasons in the dpe, I think it is fair that there a greater risk of a mental burnout and not a constant driving force, the guy went on-off retirement, maybe the chance are higher with Orr.

 

[blogofmike]

I think the answer of Orr v. Lemieux goes to Orr if he stays in Boston, but might be more of a coin flip if he goes to Chicago.

He has to go to Chicago right? The Bruins offered him 18% of the team and Eagleson didn't tell Orr (even if the media knew). It wasn't a shortage of money or lowball offer that made Orr leave - it was Eagleson sneakiness.

Wow... that's one heck of a false equivalency. So let me get this straight, when Lemieux scores at a pace faster than his season average before his season concludes, it's dismissed as an unsustainable hot streak, but when Gretzky does the same... it's considered business as usual?
I have nothing more to say about that analysis.

Yep. People on long scoring streaks tend to be scoring at an unusually high pace, be it luck, or skill, or wizards, or whatever.

Gretzky hit 3 points a game for 51 games. Had he stopped then, would it be reasonable to assume he would hit 240?

Lemieux scored at a 179 point pace for 46 games. For the the other 13 games, he scored at a 123 point pace.

Furthermore, Lemieux was only outscoring Gretzky on the powerplay, at a time when Pittsburgh was 3rd in PP chances and LA was 20th (of 21).

Player	GP	ESP	SHP	PPP
Gretzky	58​	76​	4​	30​
Lemieux	58​	70​	3​	48​

Shouldn't the better player be winning the even strength scoring race too?

 

[TheStatican]

Yep. People on long scoring streaks tend to be scoring at an unusually high pace, be it luck, or skill, or wizards, or whatever.

You completely missed the point I was making in that response, there's a double standard that is being applied.

Player	GP	ESP	SHP	PPP
Gretzky	58​	76​	4​	30​
Lemieux	58​	70​	3​	48​

Shouldn't the better player be winning the even strength scoring race too?

Wait... so McDavid wasn't the best player in the league in 21-22 OR 22-23??

 

[Staniowski]

20 healthy years of Orr and Lemieux should be among the biggest dreams of any hockey fan. If it really happened, they'd very likely be widely considered the two greatest hockey players ever.

Orr was basically done when he was the same age McDavid is right now. So, if you give Orr a bit better health over his 9 seasons, plus another 10 seasons or so, it would be pretty difficult for any player to match his career. Even as it is, he's likely the best ever.

Late '70s and early '80s are pretty loosey-goosey....there's a big improvement in league skating, overall, in the '80s....and a big jump in team defense, overall talent, etc. in the mid-'80s. But Orr should sail through all this without any problems, although his relative skating advantage is a bit less later in his career.

How many points does Orr get? Possibly a very big number.

Lemieux...he probably scores 200 points multiple times (maybe several), and probably takes the season goals (92) and points (215) records from Gretzky, even though overall NHL scoring declines. A good chance he wins 15 or more scoring titles. It's hard to imagine anybody beating him for a long time, even Jagr.

 

[Jets4Life]

Definitely very optimistic guesses. Orr winning 12 straight norris trophies, Lemieux winning 17 straight art ross...

If Lemieux would ahve stayed healthy every year, it's possible that he could have won the Art Ross every years from 1987-88 to 2001-02.

 

[Jets4Life]

Not sure how literally you want to take the comparisons, but the problem with taking the Lemieux timeline is the Penguins financial problems in the late 90s and early 2000s, stripping his supporting cast, so other real world constraints would enter into the whole dynamic...

Even with Jagr & company gone, Lemieux still finished with a better PPG than anyone in the top 20 in scoring for 2001-02. In 2002-23, only Peter Forsberg had a higher PPG than Lemieux, which was the first time anyone had done that since 1990-91. Lemieux still finished 8th in scoring, in spite of missing 15 games.

 

[Jets4Life]

Lemieux...he probably scores 200 points multiple times (maybe several), and probably takes the season goals (92) and points (215) records from Gretzky, even though overall NHL scoring declines. A good chance he wins 15 or more scoring titles. It's hard to imagine anybody beating him for a long time, even Jagr.

as much as I pump Lemieux's tires, there is no way that he breaks Gretzky's scoring record. Gretzky in the 80s was superior to any player at any time in NHL history. Five times he eclipsed 200 points, something I probably will never see in my lifetime again. Lemieux was great, and perhaps he could have eclipsed 200 points in 1992-93, assuming he was healthy, but that would be it.

 

[Gorskyontario]

as much as I pump Lemieux's tires, there is no way that he breaks Gretzky's scoring record. Gretzky in the 80s was superior to any player at any time in NHL history. Five times he eclipsed 200 points, something I probably will never see in my lifetime again. Lemieux was great, and perhaps he could have eclipsed 200 points in 1992-93, assuming he was healthy, but that would be it.

If theoretically Mario Lemieux was healthy and played every year 82 games from 84/85 until 05/06 he would easily have an extra 1100 points to catch Gretzky. This is simply a matter of math.

 

[MadLuke]

and perhaps he could have eclipsed 200 points in 1992-93, assuming he was healthy, but that would be it.

Why not in 89-90-91-92 has well ? We know for sure he could have in 1989, 90-91-92 is quite speculative, but 90-91 Coffey is still there.

 

[bobholly39]

Shouldn't the better player be winning the even strength scoring race too?

No, he shouldn't.

The best player should be the one who scores most points (strictly looking at offense). Sometimes, that means said player gets more points on the powerplay, sometimes at even strength - sometimes both. But in the end - total points matters, that's literally it.

If Gretzky had scored 215 points in 1986, all on the power, or none on the power play - the season's accomplishments are exactly the same.

A point is a point.

If you want to start assigning different values to points - you're better off starting by differentiating how important is a point to a victory - ie a point in 1 or 2 goal lead/deficit vs a blowout? That probably holds more importance than even strength vs power play points.

 

[TheStatican]

as much as I pump Lemieux's tires, there is no way that he breaks Gretzky's scoring record. Gretzky in the 80s was superior to any player at any time in NHL history. Five times he eclipsed 200 points, something I probably will never see in my lifetime again. Lemieux was great, and perhaps he could have eclipsed 200 points in 1992-93, assuming he was healthy, but that would be it.

Healthy Lemieux almost assuredly breaks Gretzky's single season goal and points record in 92-93, obviously not the assist mark no one is ever breaking that. One might question whether he could achieve it in 80 games but remember, that season had 84 games. At his scoring rate that amounts to an extra 11 points. Also Lemieux actually put up his 160 points in about 58 games, not 60. He missed about 2 extra games worth of ice time that season, for reasons that's been well documented here. That means he would have 26 games to put up 24 goals and 56 points to break the records - a relatively modest 2.15ppg.

Career total's are another matter. If we're being fair to Gretzky we should also assume no back injury for him in 91-92 either which most likely puts him over 3,000. He did have the benefit of playing those 5 extra years 80-85 in the highest scoring era, while Lemieux would have to make that up with 5 years in the DPE and that's just not happening - and some people don't think I'm reasonable. Still I do think Mario has the career goals mark either way.

Also, we also shouldn't assumed that Lemieux, or Orr, wouldn't miss any time at all. It's unrealistic to expect a full career from either with zero missed games. Minor injuries would still occur here and there and cost them some time, though of course far less. For this scenario Lemieux's stats prior to 89-90 would stay largely the same since it appears he only missed one game(in 85-86) due to a back-related injury. In all that amounts to 30-odd games:
Hockeycentral | Mario Lemieux | Medical Record

 

[bobholly39]

Healthy Lemieux almost assuredly breaks Gretzky's single season goal and points record in 92-93, obviously not the assist mark no one is ever breaking that. One might question whether he could achieve it in 80 games but remember, that season had 84 games. At Lemieux's scoring rate that amounts to an extra 11 points. Also Lemieux actually put up his 160 points in about 58 games, not 60. He missed about 2 extra games worth of ice time that season, for reasons that's been well documented here. That means he would have 26 games to put up 24 goals and 56 points - a relatively modest 2.15ppg. It's highly unlikely that a healthy Lemieux would perform below that level.

Career total's are another matter. If we're being fair to Gretzky we should also assume no back injury for him in 91-92 either which most likely puts him over 3,000. He did have the benefit of playing those 5 extra years 80-85 in the highest scoring era, while Lemieux would have to make that up with 5 years in the DPE and that's just not happening - and some people don't think I'm reasonable. Still I do think Mario has the career goals mark either way.

Also, we also shouldn't assumed that Lemieux, or Orr, wouldn't miss any time at all. It's unrealistic to expect a full career from either with zero missed games. Minor injuries would still occur here and there and cost them some time, though of course far less. If so, then for this scenario we probably shouldn't assume any major changes prior the 1989-90 season for Lemieux, as it appears he only missed one game(in 85-86) due to a back-related injury; Hockeycentral | Mario Lemieux | Medical Record

Not sure about assuredly beating anyting. It's a possibility though. I think the way I'd say it is:

If Lemieux had full health, and was able to play mostly full, healthy seasons after 89, so including 1990, 1991, 1992, 1993 and 1994 - he has a fantastic chance at breaking either Gretzky's single season goal or point record. But that's all it is - a good chance, but definitely not a certainty, since it's an extremely high bar.

1992-1993 is just one season, and as it is it's already an unusual one for him. Because he did miss time, significant time for a very serious reason, which impacted him. It impacted him negatively from a performance standpoint maybe, but also positively by fueling him with some extra motivation upon his return. If 1992-1993 was fully healthy instead, it probably plays out in a completely different way...maybe you guess at 180 points, or at 200 points, or 220+...but hard to say for sure.

Gretzky had ~5-6 shots at 200+ points, and he made the most of it. 200+ 4x, 196 once and 183 once.

Lemieux really onle had one shot at 200+ point, in 1989. And that's the biggest diference in their peaks. Because 1989 is when he really hit his full peak...and is also when injuries started piling up. Give Lemieux a fully healthy run of ~4-5 seasons after 1989, and who knows what he accomplishes.

 

[BraveCanadian]

No, he shouldn't.

The best player should be the one who scores most points (strictly looking at offense). Sometimes, that means said player gets more points on the powerplay, sometimes at even strength - sometimes both. But in the end - total points matters, that's literally it.

If Gretzky had scored 215 points in 1986, all on the power, or none on the power play - the season's accomplishments are exactly the same.

A point is a point.

If you want to start assigning different values to points - you're better off starting by differentiating how important is a point to a victory - ie a point in 1 or 2 goal lead/deficit vs a blowout? That probably holds more importance than even strength vs power play points.

A point is a point, but getting them at even strength has more impact on the game.

Being better in 5v5 play also removes a variable (the referees) from your success or failure somewhat.

Gretzky is - by far - the best ES scorer in history and I think that has a lot to do with his success overall.

 

[bobholly39]

A point is a point, but getting them at even strength has more impact on the game.

Being better in 5v5 play also removes a variable (the referees) from your success or failure somewhat.

Gretzky is - by far - the best ES scorer history and I think that has a lot to do with his success overall.

Explain how getting a point at even strength has more impact on a game? I'm not sure I follow. A goal scored on the powerplay can be a huge momentum changer in a game...not really sure I get how an ES vs PP goal is more/less impactful.

As for being better in 5v5 removing a variable (referee)...shouldn't that only matter when considering future predictions? There are no variables in the past as things already occured. Gretzky and Lemieux and whoever else scored all the points they did - be it at PP or ES. So - rate them on actual total points, no need to differentiate.

At the extreme - I might agree that when looking at predicting future success, a player that relies only on PP to score is a riskier bet than one who scan score in all situations. But - that's only for any futue prediction - because it's possible PP opportunities go way down in future. But when considering past results, there's no difference to me.

 

[Gorskyontario]

Career total's are another matter. If we're being fair to Gretzky we should also assume no back injury for him in 91-92 either which most likely puts him over 3,000. He did have the benefit of playing those 5 extra years 80-85 in the highest scoring era, while Lemieux would have to make that up with 5 years in the DPE and that's just not happening - and some people don't think I'm reasonable. Still I do think Mario has the career goals mark either way.

This thread isn't about healthy Gretzky, who missed time like most other players did with injuries.

Mario Lemieux played 915 games out of 1594 games(84/85 - 03)/04). If he scored at the exact same ratio he did, he would be at 3001 points. This is not including the 05/06 season.

 

[BraveCanadian]

This thread isn't about healthy Gretzky, who missed time like most other players did with injuries.

Mario Lemieux played 915 games out of 1594 games(84/85 - 03)/04). If he scored at the exact same ratio he did, he would be at 3001 points. This is not including the 05/06 season.

He no longer ages, either?

Explain how getting a point at even strength has more impact on a game? I'm not sure I follow. A goal scored on the powerplay can be a huge momentum changer in a game...not really sure I get how an ES vs PP goal is more/less impactful.

As for being better in 5v5 removing a variable (referee)...shouldn't that only matter when considering future predictions? There are no variables in the past as things already occured. Gretzky and Lemieux and whoever else scored all the points they did - be it at PP or ES. So - rate them on actual total points, no need to differentiate.

At the extreme - I might agree that when looking at predicting future success, a player that relies only on PP to score is a riskier bet than one who scan score in all situations. But - that's only for any futue prediction - because it's possible PP opportunities go way down in future. But when considering past results, there's no difference to me.

This just looks like a bunch of hand waving -- ES play drives the game because most of the time in the game is at ES. Furthermore, ES time is in your control and PP time is not - for obvious reasons. Over time 5v5 ability makes a big difference.

 

[Gorskyontario]

He no longer ages, either?

His gpg is slightly lowered by his much smaller scoring at the end of his career.
His better health would account for better scoring during his career. Obviously there is a margin of error, statistically it would make sense that it would balance out. Healthier and scoring more in the 80s and early 90s, more games in the lower scoring DPE. I do not understand how this is confusing.