Hey! I go after that +4/+50 split in 1970 all the time!
Here are some issues I believe are relevant to the current discussion:
Orr’s R-on lead from 68-75 was built a little more heavily against weaker teams
Bobby Orr’s ratio is not uniform. No one’s would be, but there is a tendency to gain more of a lead over his teammates against the awful teams than against the good teams.
Detailed GF/GA isn’t available for splits. But we can use plus/minus.
From 1968-75, Orr’s unit is a +19 against Chicago. His team is a +18. That is the smallest gap over his teammates (and that actually improved near the end as Chicago declined as a team.)
From 1968-75, Orr is a +79 vs the Seals. His team is a +19. (The Seals were consistently awful.)
The other largest gaps vs the E6+ on a per game basis are:
The newbies like the Caps +20/+11 and Islanders +18/+6 (only 5 games against the 446 GA Caps, 13 GP vs Isles).
The Sabres +28/-6 (by 1975 they had improved, and the gap was -3/-5).
The Kings +49/+9 (by 1975 they had also improved, and the gap was -5/+1)
Counter to my point, there was one impressively large gap against an O6 team: the Rangers. +50/-4.
Orr’s unit’s r-on was better than his teammates, but he sure milked the weaker teams when given the opportunity and I think the gap between the two ratios is partly explained by that.
Orr’s R-off is not indicative of team strength
Orr’s low r-off overstates his value. When he missed the game, Orr’s teammates didn’t post an even ratio. They kept posting dominating ratios. In 1973, if only for 15 games, they matched the team ratio with Orr in the lineup. In 1977-78 they had the same ESGF/ESGA as the 75 Bruins. They essentially reproduced BOTH the same Adjusted ESGF and ESGA totals.
(If the Bruins play differently when he’s off the ice, that may skew ratios. Not in a conspiracy, just in a way that suggests the Bruins were happy to be less adventurous and leave the heavy lifting to Orr. It's been a complaint before: JUBILATION AND A CUP IN PHILLY . Orr may be the Anti-Gainey of Adjusted Plus Minus.)
By contrast, the Oilers lost Gretzky and the streak of (Adjusted to a 200 ESG environment) 240-280 ESGF seasons ended, even as ESGA stayed the same. The Kings started a streak for three years (ESGA was the same for 2 years), the ending of which coincides with Gretzky no longer being a 100 ES point man. The Kings didn’t do anything like that before or after.
Pluses and ESGF are LESS indicative of individual offensive contribution and can be skewed by on-ice support.
Oilers Gretzky was on-ice for 193 playoff ESGF you say? Makes sense. He scored 154 ES points. So a lot of that probably has to do with him, and the percentage of offense he’s involved in checks out against other elite scoring forwards.
Orr was on-ice for 118 playoff ESGF? A little more puzzling since he only had 50 ES points.
BUT HE’S A DEFENSEMAN!
Right, so why does he seem to be getting so much credit for 118 goals of which he directly helped on 42%? 42% isn’t an untouchable mark for blueliners. It isn’t even high for top defenders. So why give Orr more credit?
Ray Bourque is in this round. From 1980-92, with 71 ES points, he seems to have helped on 45% of the ESGF he was on-ice for.
Doug Harvey is up for debate. And he… Well he had a red sweater.
Someone who isn’t up for debate played in the 1970s. During that time this defender scored 38 ES points in 59 playoff games, which was nearly half (49%) of the 77 he’s estimated to be on for. (He also had a 13 ES point run in 13 games which beats Orr’s career best 12 in 15, and his r-on is 1.510 and r-off 0.696 in this span. In all honesty I think he’s a better playoff performer than Orr. Not too long ago, many on this board agreed with me.)
Anyways, I’ve previously discussed point-making vs point-taking. Point-making being a product of your own play creating points over and above other players. Point-taking would be collecting points that other players could get too. Had Edmonton kept posting the same GF totals after the trade, it would indicate that more of his production was point-taking than it looks. But the Oilers didn’t – they declined, ,and his new team shot up by a similar amount to the drop, and he remained a 100 ES point player.
But that doesn’t mean all of his ES points are point-making. Just by being a top line player, you are somewhat of a point-taker. Even Gretzky. The value comes from how much you produce that others would not.
Bobby Orr is a plus-maker. Orr is also a plus-taker. Everyone is. The extent to which he belongs in each category is unknown to me. But I fear many see all the pluses and assign all the credit to him, even as he participated in a lower share of playoff ESGF than young/prime Bourque or young Potvin (or young Coffey, but that’s cheating) who get a smaller share of free pluses because they weren’t playing with a Bruins team that was scoring even after Orr went to Chicago.
