The Bobby Orr Trophy (Why not?)

[Mickey Marner]

King Clancy sounds nice. That would be a good name for the trophy.

It is the name of a trophy.

 

[Harhis]

I think thats a great idea. Forwards have an offensive and a defensive award.

Tbf selke winner isn't necessarily the best defensive forward.

 

[Harvey Birdman]

Ive been down for something like this for quite sometime. Have the Norris be the actual best defensive defenseman, and the Orr/Coffey be defender with the highest point total.

 

[Channelcat]

I like history, but I also like change that reflects the game today. A lot of kids who follow the game now probably have never heard of James Norris.

I think the Bobby Orr trophy would be a perfect update in renaming the Norris Trophy, It could not be a better fit in describing the best defenceman in the NHL than to name it after the best defenceman that has ever played the game.

I would not be against renaming the Hart the Wayne Gretzky Trophy and the Bill Masterton the Mario Lemieux Trophy either to reflect a modern image.

I don't know anything about Norris, Masterton etc.......but I think this is terrible idea.

 

[Channelcat]

Tbf selke winner isn't necessarily the best defensive forward.

No, the Selke is a joke, so is the Norris and anything else that the hockey writers vote on. Half these guys don't even watch 10 games in a season, just chat with their writer buddies, scroll through their twitter feed and decide on a winner.

 

[hairylikebear]

The Norris already heavily weighs offense so it doesn't make a lot of sense to add another offensive defenseman trophy. Adding the Orr trophy might skew this effect a little but the voters for the Norris already think they're voting for the best defenseman, it just so happens that they focus more on points than defense.

Otherwise, you're changing the definition of the Norris entirely to best defensive defenseman which makes tracking awards for historical player evaluation needlessly complicated. It would make more sense to me to create a new award called the Shore trophy or something for the best defensive defenseman, and if you really need to honor Orr, rename the Norris as has been suggested, but it really is best to just keep that the way it is.

The difference between this idea and the Richard is that forwards are already celebrated for their offense, so adding another offensive award doesn't distract from Hart voting in any way. That's why adding the defensive defenseman award makes sense to me, because defensemen are primarily for playing defense (with variation just like with forwards) so adding another award like that won't affect the meaning of the Norris.

It's like when they added the Jennings and changed the Vezina from best GAA to best overall goalie. It was a clumsy maneuver to me and doesn't need to be repeated.

I can definitely see though if you're not focused on hockey history and keeping awards consistent why this would be a good idea. More awards are definitely fun and if any former player deserves this recognition, it's Orr.

 

[DowntownBooster]

Either rename the trophies or stop trying to intro new ones.

The Art Ross to the Wayne Gretzky
The Hart to the Howe
The Norris to the Orr

I agree that they should stop trying to introduce new trophies. However, I disagree with renaming the existing trophies. I believe the players that have their names engraved on the trophies are proud to be listed on the same trophy won by the legends of the past such as Howe, Orr and Gretzky. It wouldn't seem right to rename a trophy after a player whose name is already on it. I say just leave things the way they are.

 

[Agent Zub]

I don't think Karlsson has been the best all around defensemen. If all there was too playing defense was scoring points, then yeah, sure, but there's more to D than that.

The best offensive defenseman can be the best all around defenseman, but if Karlsson is considered the best all around defenseman, I would beg to differ. He is definitely the top offensive defenseman though, IMO.

Serious question.

Did you see the playoffs last year? Or his regular season?

Classifying Karlsson as strictly an offensive defenseman is a fault.

Barring injury he has demonstrated he can be the most complete player in the league.

 

[The Winter Soldier]

I don't know anything about Norris, Masterton etc.......but I think this is terrible idea.

James Norris was a hockey franchise Owner. Never played Defence in his lifetime from what I know of him, so I am not sure how he got his name on a trophy awarding the excellence of a Defenceman. We know Orr did play Defence, and very well I think most would agree here. Still think it's a terrible idea?

 

[snowkiddin]

Serious question.

Did you see the playoffs last year? Or his regular season?

Classifying Karlsson as strictly an offensive defenseman is a fault.

Barring injury he has demonstrated he can be the most complete player in the league.

Not sure where I classified him as “strictly an offensive defenseman”, can you please point it out to me?

 

[BruinsBtn]

i didn't mean to imply that at all, i was just moreso saying it has come up over the decades in the past. the nhl doesn't seem interested.





not in the slightest, he gets points which is sexy to many but i don't think many real hockey experts would pretend he's actually been the best dman period.

This is insane. He went an entire Cup run without a single goal against.

He was +126 one year.

 

[John Eichel da GOAT]

We already have that trophy. Its called the Norris...

But really, I agree with you, we need offensive and defensive awards for dmen. Instead we just give the Norris to whoever puts up the most points.

Norris should go to the dman when taking into account advanced stats, blocked shots, +/-, and any other stats I cant think of that arent strictly Gucci's and apples.

Bobby orr should go to the top scoring dman in points.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

This is insane. He went an entire Cup run without a single goal against.

That's not quite correct, but he was great defensively in both of the Cup runs.

In 1970 he was on the ice for 11 ES goals against in 14 games. If you assume that he played 20 ES minutes per game, that's a personal GAA of about 2.36 (league average was 2.90 - per team).

In 1972 he was stellar - on the ice for 7 ES goals against in 15 games. Again if you assume he played 20 ES minutes per game, that's a personal GAA of about 1.40 (league average was 3.07 - per team).

To but that into context, here are some recent results for a few to playoff runs from defensemen (in a much lower scoring era):

• Chris Pronger 2006 - 2.34 ES GAA
• Nicklas Lidstrom 2002 - 2.05 ES GAA
• Duncan Keith 2015 - 2.04 ES GAA
• Zdenoa Chara 2011 - 1.91 ES GAA
• Scott Stevens 2000 - 1.87 ES GAA

 

[Iapyi]

This is insane. He went an entire Cup run without a single goal against.

He was +126 one year.

who are you talking about? despite plus/minus being a horrible gauge for individual performance the best he's ever had was a +16. maybe re-read the post you quoted.

btw - it was post #35

 

[b in vancouver]

This was what I wanted to say here, so thank you for saving me the time and effort. An offensive defenseman award named after Bobby Orr would be minimizing him and his all around greatness.

That's where I land on this. Just seems like it's diminishing. Orr was everything a hockey player could be. If they ever added an offensive d-man award I hope they don't attach Orr's name to it. The only trophy I think his name could be on is some kind of lifetime achievement that given out every 5-15 years for players who changed the game as some kind of elite of the elite Hall Of Fame inductees like Lafleur, Gretzky, Lemieux, Bourque, Jagr, Crosby (missing one or two) and a few post-humous ones.


sidenote:
Strangely, as their both Bruins, Bourque also is getting remembered as a more offensive defence man, where he put up points, but it was also how good he was in all three zones, in front of the net and one-on-one battles and could hit like a truck.

 

[b in vancouver]

who are you talking about? despite plus/minus being a horrible gauge for individual performance the best he's ever had was a +16. maybe re-read the post you quoted.

btw - it was post #35

That argument falls apart when talking about Orr.
+124 in a season tells you pretty clearly that individuals performance.
I think having a plus/minus of 582 in 657 games pretty much paints the picture.
If you take out his rookie year he was actually plus 581 in 596 games. which might be the most insane statistic out there. That's spotting the other team a goal a game because he plays for them.

 

[Iapyi]

That argument falls apart when talking about Orr.
+124 in a season tells you pretty clearly that individuals performance.
I think having a plus/minus of 582 in 657 games pretty much paints the picture.
If you take out his rookie year he was actually plus 581 in 596 games. which might be the most insane statistic out there. That's spotting the other team a goal a game because he plays for them.

was never talking about orr.

the poster quoted me and referenced orr even though i was replying to another poster about karlsson.

in any event i still think plus/minus is a horrible gauge for individual performance. actually i think it's pretty much useless for anything.

 

[Ciao]

Did you watch him play? He wasnt a shut down dman.

Listen, my avatar comes from Ork.

Which planet are you from?

Here on Earth, Bobby Orr was the greatest defenceman who ever played on either side of the puck.

Your observations must come from some other planet.

 

[b in vancouver]

was never talking about orr.

the poster quoted me and referenced orr even though i was replying to another poster about karlsson.

in any event i still think plus/minus is a horrible gauge for individual performance. actually i think it's pretty much useless for anything.

I get it. Except when it's brought up in an Orr thread. I know you weren't talking about him but - He's the exception to the rule.
If it was a Dallas Smith thread and people mentioned his +98 as the 4th highest ever - it would be easy to simply say - 'Ya, because he was Orr's defensive partner.'
Orr's +- is simply past the pale. He's the player who made everyone's plus/minus on the Bruins skyrocket.

 

[Butch 19]

Oh, just call it the Karlssen award and get on with it already!

 

[Iapyi]

I get it. Except when it's brought up in an Orr thread. I know you weren't talking about him but - He's the exception to the rule.
If it was a Dallas Smith thread and people mentioned his +98 as the 4th highest ever - it would be easy to simply say - 'Ya, because he was Orr's defensive partner.'
Orr's +- is simply past the pale. He's the player who made everyone's plus/minus on the Bruins skyrocket.

i appreciate what you are saying but in my mind at the very most it can be used internally within a team. even that is wishy washy.

why would orr be an exception to the rule but not gretzky?

 

[Iapyi]

Oh, just call it the Karlssen award and get on with it already!

according to hockey-reference there has never been a 'karlssen' play in the nhl. who exactly would this 'award' be honouring?

 

[Butch 19]

according to hockey-reference there has never been a 'karlssen' play in the nhl. who exactly would this 'award' be honouring?

Really? You have no idea whom I may be referring to?

 

[LaP]

Interesting idea. But would they turn the Norris into the best defensive defenseman award or best overall? I'd prefer best overall.

Personally i would do the opposite cause it would denature the Norris to turn it into a purely defensive trophy. Let's not forget some journalists in the past have put Hall Gill in their top 30 ...

I would keep the Norris the way it is and would create a new trophy for purely defensive dmen. It could be called the Josh Gorges was grossly overrated trophy or more simply the JGWGOT.

 

[Filatov2Kovalev2Bonk]

Honestly I'd rather get on board for the Shore trophy, to encourage players to ameliorate their positioning, takeaways, defensive play an so on. More precise play = better team success and team > players.