I never saw Orr play, so it's hard to say... and at the same time, since I was born in 86, I missed Gretzky at his peak and have really barely seen him play at all. But... it's ludicrous the way he dominated. I mean, what the hell? Really? 1984, he wins the ross by 89 points. 1985 he wins the Ross by 83 points. What the hell? What's wrong with all the other players in the NHL? Are they on dope? 1986. He wins the Ross by a margin of 74 points. Are you *****ing kidding me? I was a fetus back in '86, are these numbers real? Has someone been altering the record books? Good lord, 163 assists? Without scoring a goal he wins the Ross! 1987, he wins the scoring title by 75 points. With 121 assists, he wins the scoring title by a healthy margin without even scoring a goal, AGAIN. Didn't think ONCE was enough Wayne?
I know we've all seen these numbers before, but they deserve to be repeated. This kind of statistical dominance is unparalleled. Of course, then he left the Edmonton Oilers and could only manage to lead the league in scoring a dismal three times. Three times Wayne? Come on.
I mean, he has a THOUSAND POINTS on #2, Messier. Messier has 37 points on #3, Howe. WHAT? Are we missing players here? What's with the dropoff? What the freaking crap? How did this happen? How could anyone dominate like that? Was Hockey fixed in the 80's?
Stats don't prove a player, sure. 200 points in the 80's isn't equivalent to 200 points in the 90s and all. But the Margin between Gretzky's stats and the next guy is simply mind boggling. I literally cannot imagine how it happened. I can't concieve of a guy going out and scoring 92 goals in a season, or hitting 163 assists. It just blows my mind, I don't understand what that would look like on a game by game basis.
In all of Hockey history, the only two players who really approach that statistical dominance are Orr and Lemieux, right? Lemieux, projected over a healthy career as long as Gretzky's, probably outscores him. But that's projected, we don't know. Same deal with Orr, if he'd been a forward and stayed healthy, maybe he'd have Gretzky like numbers. The difference is Gretzky did it. The problem is that you take any other player and you have to try to prove that they're the best, with Gretzky you don't need to debate or argue, the numbers just speak for themselves.
Now having said all that... I don't necessarily think that means Gretzky is better than Bobby Orr. I think its unfair to compare because even a defensemen like Bobby Orr is still a defensemen and Gretzky is a forward. But to me, what Gretzky did makes him as good as anyone else who ever played the game. I think it's kind of crazy (though a lot of fun, which is why we debate it all the time) to try to pick anyone as a clear cut number one of all time, but I think that no matter who you pick, Gretzky has to be at least tied for the first overall. Anything below requires far, far too much denial of overwhelming statisical evidence. And he's the only player who I can say that about.
The mere fact that Orr actually only won 2 scoring titles, even as a defenceman, when he is considered by some to be the best player ever is mind boggling.
Maybe they should've instituted a best forward award just so Orr wouldn't have trumped Wayne then? Amazing how this whole award issue makes people a bit shallow towards the what Orr actually did accomplish during his career.
And you wonder why people on here get on your back.
Well you would think the best player ever would be able to win the scoring title more than a measley 2 times. Espo, LaFleur, Jagr, Mikita, Hull, all won it more than twice, but are all considered well beneath Orr.
Whereas Gretzky won the Art Ross 10 times by beating players like;
Messier(2nd all-time points)
Francis (4th all-time)
Dionne(5th All-time)
Yzerman(6th All-time)
Coffey(10th All-time)
Sakic(11th All-time)
Trottier (14th All-time)
Oates(15th All-time)
Gilmour(16th All-time)
Hawerchuk(17th All-time)
Robitaille(19th All-time)
Hull(20th All-time)
D. Savard(23rd All-time)
P. Stastny(32nd All-time)
*Lemieux(7th All-time)*
Gretzky absolutely, overwhelmingly, dominated an era that produced 13 of the top 20 all-time point producers in the history of the NHL, not counting himself. The only Notable exception is #7 All-time in scoring, Mario Lemieux, who was entering his prime as Gretzky was ending his, and was the only player in the entire era who could even come close to Gretzky's skill and offensive prowess.
So sorry if I don't buy Bobby Orr being sooooo dominating when he was getting beat by his own teammates fo the Art Ross, and Hart Trophies. There were obviously players in Orr's era that weren't that far off his skill level. Otherwise he would have dominated the individual awards the same way Gretzky and, to a lesser extent, Lemieux did. So if we judge a player against his peers, Gretzky dominated his peers longer and by a bigger margin than Bobby Orr dominated his own peers.
To me that means Gretzky is #1 overall, All-time.
Doug Harvey
Those were all very good defensive players too weren't they? Try to keep in mind that hockey is played on both ends of the ice. How many other defencemen have ever won the art ross?
And there is a "best forward award", it's called the art ross. It just so happens that Orr stole it for a couple of years.
Bingo. Just think about this for a second: a defenceman won the Art Ross. Repeat it to yourself: a defenceman won the Art Ross. Some people don't understand how incredible that is. The closest comparison I could think of would be a tight end - whose responsibility is blocking, physical play and occasionally making a catch - leading the NFL in receiving yards and touchdowns.Those were all very good defensive players too weren't they? Try to keep in mind that hockey is played on both ends of the ice. How many other defencemen have ever won the art ross?
And there is a "best forward award", it's called the art ross. It just so happens that Orr stole it for a couple of years.
Well you would think the best player ever would be able to win the scoring title more than a measley 2 times.
So by your definition, it's impossible for a goaltender to be the best player ever?
Let's make up a goaltender who plays for twenty seasons and never allows a single goal. According to you, he's not the best player ever?
Bingo. Just think about this for a second: a defenceman won the Art Ross. Repeat it to yourself: a defenceman won the Art Ross. Some people don't understand how incredible that is. The closest comparison I could think of would be a tight end - whose responsibility is blocking, physical play and occasionally making a catch - leading the NFL in receiving yards and touchdowns.
And those who use stats as the measuring stick are sadly mistaken. If you want to hype Gretzky as the greatest player ever, I'm fine with that. Lord knows there are a lot of insightful, intelligent hockey people out there who rate Gretzky as the best ever. Talk about how he's the smartest player ever. Talk about how he saw and thought the game in a way that nobody else ever could. Talk about his array of effective, accurate shots. Talk about his ability to raise his game to another level in the big games, or to dominate in the playoffs. But don't just throw stats out there. This is easily the best part of HF Boards, with the most knowledgeable posters. We watched Wayne. We know his stats. So what about stats? A good friend of mine used to always say "stats are for losers." When evaluating the best player ever, you don't do it on stats. You do it on HOW HE PLAYED THE GAME. Period.
To the individual who brought up Neely: I am one of the biggest Cam Neely fans around. I have intensely argued for his inclusion in the Hall, against those who don't feel he belongs. (Including Big Phil, who's a pretty knowledgeable guy). But Cam is far from the top players ever. In terms of peak value, and how he played the game, he could be legitimately argued as a top 50 player. It's not that far of a stretch when you look at how he played in his prime. I think he's definitely one of the top 100 players in NHL history. But he's not even as good as positional contemporaries like Bossy and Kurri.
PS: raleh, who's your grandfather?
Classy response to one of the best posters on these boards.
Thanks SenRule, but your kind words are not needed.
Best to ignore the child. Remember, it's summer and school's out.
He'll be gone soon enough, back on the playground learning his next new slogan which he will repeat continually ("get bent!").
It's amusing and nakedly evident when a fool comes on to the board attempting to talk to a subject about which he knows absolutely nothing.
A quick question to those who have seen Orr play. How good was he defensively?