Who is the 5th best offensive player of all-time ??

[Rhiessan71]

By this criteria, Esposito "buried" Orr that season.

With juuuust a little bit of help from Orr himself of course heh.

What's more impressive...139 points from a Dman or 152 by a forward?
Better question, which one is the more rare of the two


I'll come at this from another angle, in this thread, Hull and Jagr have been repeated numerous times for #5.
Orr has more than a distinct edge head to head with Hull, and Jagr, as I produced earlier, is also well behind Orr's production over their first 660 games despite playing with Lemieux in a higher scoring era to boot.
And again...we're talking about getting beat by a d-man. I'm hoping if I repeat that enough, it might finally sink in
A DMAN!

What's the issue?


(PS: Orr was a dman)

 

[pappyline]

Who's talking about 69/70, I'm talking about 70/71, Hull's 3rd highest NHL point total.
Hull had 96 points, Orr had 102 assists and 139 points...getting beat by a forward by that much would be considered getting buried, getting beat by that much by a d-man...that's a freakin avalanche!

You didn't specify the season so I assumed you were talking about an Orr AR season.

Everybody is aware that Orr was a Dmen and that he was incredible offensively. I have him as the greatest player of all time. But when comparing to Hull and others lets keep things in context. Orr was in his early 20's in 70-71. Hull was in his 30's. It might have been Hull's 3rd highest point season but it was far from one of his best seasons. Boston was all about offense that season, Chicago focused on defence. Just look at the GF & GA of the 2 teams.

Stop with the stupid "freakin avalanche" and other cliches. It makes you look silly,

 

[Hardyvan123]

Hull was a pretty good playmaker as well as a great goal scorer. You don't win 3 AR's against great competition on goal scoring alone.

My original post was more in reference to Richard, I have Hull ahead of Richard.

While I was driving today I thought about Makarov but still leaning towards Jagr for overall impact in being the 5th best all time.

 

[Hardyvan123]

Richard has nearly the same amount of top 5 and top 10 seasons than Hull so I don't see why people are so quick to dismiss him. He could be the clutchest player of all time.

This might very well be true but the thread is about the best offensive player of all time and it's almost impossible to put a guy whose best finish in points was 2nd (he did it 5 times but also it was only a 6 team league as well).

Heck I'm not even sure that Richard was a better goal scorer than Hull was but that's for another thread.

 

[Hardyvan123]

In the regular season, sure. In the playoffs, Richard outscored Hull by similar margins to what Hull outscored Richard in the regular season. And both these men played a significant sample size of playoff games (especially Richard).



Why on Earth would you do a thing like that? Even if Forsberg was as good overall as Jagr (and that's a big if), Jagr was significantly better offensively.



Good point. There is certainly an argument for Orr as one of the 4 best offensive players of all-time, but I don't think it should be assumed as a given.

The Forsberg comp i agree totally with you, it hardly deserves comment but someone had to do it.

As for Richard outscoring Hull by the same margin in the playoffs, sure with goal scoring but overall in points hull's record is better and there is also Hull' s WHA years and the 45 year that Richard played in when the NHL wasn't at it strongest either.

Hull also has 7 1st place goal scoring finishes to Richard's 5 and also led the league in scoring 3 times as well.

 

[Rhiessan71]

You didn't specify the season so I assumed you were talking about an Orr AR season.

Everybody is aware that Orr was a Dmen and that he was incredible offensively. I have him as the greatest player of all time. But when comparing to Hull and others lets keep things in context. Orr was in his early 20's in 70-71. Hull was in his 30's. It might have been Hull's 3rd highest point season but it was far from one of his best seasons. Boston was all about offense that season, Chicago focused on defence. Just look at the GF & GA of the 2 teams.

Stop with the stupid "freakin avalanche" and other cliches. It makes you look silly,

Nope, I was talking about Orr's best season to Hull's 3rd best but if you would prefer to go 1 vs 1, 2 vs 2 and down the line, we can do that too but I think we both know how that will turn out. I did actually specify it though, through the numbers I used, the 96 points, the 102 assists and the 139 points.

Now on to the next point, did Orr benefit from Boston's offensive focus or was Boston's offensive focus because of Orr. Again, I think we both know the answer to that one.
If not, I can drag out the r-on/r-off numbers of most of the Bruins from back then and show how the B's without Orr weren't much better than an above average team at best, Espo definitely included.

You don't like grand metaphor's? Fair enough, I can lay off 'em


People asked why Orr gets a pass in the top 4, I tried to show why and I think I did a pretty decent job but by all means, it's real simple, PROVE that he doesn't and come up with a better candidate.

 

[Hardyvan123]

2 Art Rosses in 8 full seasons... one of thoses Rosses coming in his final full season. Suggests he could have done a hell of a lot more given a decent level of health, never mind switching positions.

IMO, Orr falls into the same category as Lemieux in that he's so transparently superior to his peers that we don't need to spend a whole lot of time with the "what if"s.

I think you forgot something about Forsberg. 4th in all-time assist per game behind Gretzky, Lemieux, and Orr. In the top 10, for points per game.

A couple of interesting points and I guess it all depends on how people evaluate the criteria for determining these things. Myself, I'm more of a career guy but peak, prime, longevity and era all come into play as well as playoffs and international play for some players as well.

For strictly best offensive player I'm not sure where Forsberg would rank but I'm very confident putting Jagr ahead of him in terms of this thread.

 

[tazzy19]

2 Art Ross by a d-man, the ONLY 2 and the only other player to break 100 assists in a season not named Gretzky or Lemieux and the only one that didn't do it in the 80's pretty much says it all.

Although Gretzky did it twice in the 90s (102 assists in 1990, and 122 assists in 1991), which is just as impressive considering no one else, not even Mario, did it once in the 90s (or since then).

 

[MadLuke]

Although Gretzky did it twice in the 90s (102 assists in 1990, and 122 assists in 1991), which is just as impressive considering no one else, not even Mario, did it once in the 90s (or since then).

But 100 is a total arbitrary number,
Oates 97, and mainly Thorton 96, given the goals by games of Thorton year's is maybe better than Wayne 102.

 

[MadLuke]

What's more impressive...139 points from a Dman or 152 by a forward?

Depends of who is better defensively

With Orr you have your answer.

 

[Psycho Papa Joe]

People asked why Orr gets a pass in the top 4, I tried to show why and I think I did a pretty decent job but by all means, it's real simple, PROVE that he doesn't and come up with a better candidate.

I asked the question, is this thread about offensive talent or results? If it's based on results, Orr cannot be considered a better offensive player than Espo, because during their time together in Boston, Espo had more points, more goals and a better PPG. Now of course Orr was likely more talented offensively and if he had played center would have 'buried' Espo, but he didn't and Espo ended up with the superior offensive numbers. Sure Orr's accomplishments are more impressive, nobody in their right mind doubts that, but at the end of the day he produced less than his teammate.

 

[Hardyvan123]

I asked the question, is this thread about offensive talent or results? If it's based on results, Orr cannot be considered a better offensive player than Espo, because during their time together in Boston, Espo had more points, more goals and a better PPG. Now of course Orr was likely more talented offensively and if he had played center would have 'buried' Espo, but he didn't and Espo ended up with the superior offensive numbers. Sure Orr's accomplishments are more impressive, nobody in their right mind doubts that, but at the end of the day he produced less than his teammate.

I'm sorry but Phil was on a very good to excellent career path before he gets traded to Orr's Bruins.

As a 24 year old he had 61 points in 69 games in the alst 06 season which was good for 8th in the league (5 of the top 9 scorers were on the black Hawks that year)and in 68 with 12 teams and Orr he had 84 points in his breakout year at age 25.

IMO there is a direct correlation to Phil's scoring prowess and Bobby Orr and for me big Phil isn't even in the top 10 on my list for this thread but I understand that is probably a minority viewpoint.

Also if it was purely about talent and not results Kent the magic man Nilson name should come up as well but at the end of the day results do carry more weight than pure individual skill.

 

[seventieslord]

IMO there is a direct correlation to Phil's scoring prowess and Bobby Orr

It's not just your opinion.

 

[KingGallagherXI]

This might very well be true but the thread is about the best offensive player of all time and it's almost impossible to put a guy whose best finish in points was 2nd (he did it 5 times but also it was only a 6 team league as well).

Heck I'm not even sure that Richard was a better goal scorer than Hull was but that's for another thread.

His top 5 and top 10 finishes are among the best of all time. I don't know where he ranks exactly, but he has 1 more top 5 than Hull and is tied for top 10. Also, being clutch, i.e. dominating when it matters the most shouldn't be underestimated.

 

[Rhiessan71]

It's not just your opinion.

Agreed.

Hardy and I don't see eye to eye on much but we do on this.

(Not sure who is scared more by this, him or I? )

 

[Pear Juice]

Seeing as it passed blindly by before the Orr discussion I'll throw it in there again. For pure offensive ability, disregarding team success and only considering the regular season. Would you put Marcel Dionne into the mix? Often overlooked due to his lack of team success, but I'm not sure if the question asked in this thread requires any team success. In terms of regular season offensive output surely we must put him in the top-10, right?

- 8 seasons of 100+ points
- 6 seasons of 50+ goals
- 4th all time in goals scored with 731
- 5th all time in points with 1771

 

[Czech Your Math]

Seeing as it passed blindly by before the Orr discussion I'll throw it in there again. For pure offensive ability, disregarding team success and only considering the regular season. Would you put Marcel Dionne into the mix? Often overlooked due to his lack of team success, but I'm not sure if the question asked in this thread requires any team success. In terms of regular season offensive output surely we must put him in the top-10, right?

- 8 seasons of 100+ points
- 6 seasons of 50+ goals
- 4th all time in goals scored with 731
- 5th all time in points with 1771

I think he should certainly be in the discussion for top 10, but not a sure thing by any means, even if only talking about regular season.

Gretzky, Lemieux
Howe, Jagr
Orr, Espo, Lafleur, Beliveau, Hull, Mikita

It might between Dionne and Sakic for 10th, if you omitted Orr, but there's a lot of guys in the discussion on a peak/prime basis.

 

[I Hate Blake Coleman]

Since Jagr is there, I'm throwing Forsberg into the mix.

Forsberg never won consecutive Art Ross trophies, let alone 5 (which is more than anyone not named Esposito, Howe, Lemieux, or Gretzky).

 

[tarheelhockey]

Gretzky, Lemieux
Howe, Jagr
Orr, Espo, Lafleur, Beliveau, Hull, Mikita

It might between Dionne and Sakic for 10th, if you omitted Orr, but there's a lot of guys in the discussion on a peak/prime basis.

If we're talking about pure offense, shouldn't Bossy be in that conversation somewhere? I think of him on a higher level than Dionne, though that might have something to do with playoff bias.

 

[Czech Your Math]

If we're talking about pure offense, shouldn't Bossy be in that conversation somewhere? I think of him on a higher level than Dionne, though that might have something to do with playoff bias.

Bossy should be in the discussion for top 10, along with Richard, if it's not restricted it to regular season. Lot of others too, depending on the parameters.

 

[Rhiessan71]

Omitting Orr is a terrible injustice.
If the guy was a forward, his numbers would only be rivaled by 99 and 66.
It's not like we're talking about Coffey here who pretty much was a forward.
We're talking about a guy that played rock solid defense and took home 2 Art Ross while doing, from the backend no less.

I'm actually in shock over how the weight of this is being ignored.
The guy devoted the least amount of effort to offense of anyone mentioned so far in this thread and is at least on par with, mostly out in front of almost everyone of them.

The guy changed the role of Dmen offensively forever. It's more than just an injustice, it's down right insulting imo.

 

[Big Phil]

For arguments sake, is Orr really one of the 4 best offensive players of all-time? Are we going by raw results, or by offensive talent? Sure Orr might have had better offensive talent, but he was outproduced by Esposito. Most of the people discussed in this thread are being evaluated on results, moreso than raw talent.

I thought that as well. I think we need to entertain the idea that Orr may not be in the top 4 in this category. Let's face it, Orr did everything elite, and that's why he's among the top 4 players of all-time, but if you isolate the offense-only, is it possible to put a defenseman in here? Even Orr?

Since Jagr is there, I'm throwing Forsberg into the mix.

Impossible. He won his only scoring title by a mere two points. If you throw in Forsberg you may as well throw in Lindros. Neither belongs.

Richard has nearly the same amount of top 5 and top 10 seasons than Hull so I don't see why people are so quick to dismiss him. He could be the clutchest player of all time.

Other than Gretzky, you can easily make an argument that Richard is the most clutch player in NHL history. Who else is arguably better in that category? Patrick Roy perhaps? As far as I am concerned it is that trifecta first and then the rest. However, the assists for Richard are too low for him to be #5 offensive player of all-time.

Here's another name to ponder: Jean Beliveau.

The OP can be forgiven for not including him originally. There is a very intriguing argument for him to be #5 all-time here. First off, let's take the general consensus 5 next best offensive players after the "big 4".

Top 10 scoring finishes:
Beliveau - 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 6, 8, 8, 9 (12 in total)
Richard - 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 (11)
Hull - 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9 (11)
Esposito - 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 7, 9 (10)
Jagr - 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 5, 6, 8, 9 (11)

Wow, talk about tight in that regards. In total, Beliveau has the most top 10 finishes. Esposito and Jagr have the most scoring titles. Esposito has 8 top 3 finishes. Hull has 6. Everyone else has 7. Richard has the most top 5 finishes with 9. The next best is everyone else with 8.

So since that is such a small discrepancy between all the players then let's look at something else. Who was the best goal scorer out of the bunch? Hull probably. By a wide margin? Not much, but my choice as #1 of that group. Who was the worst goal scorer? Jagr maybe and that says something. Who was the best playmaker? Beliveau with the next best being Jagr. The worst? Richard?

So what does this mean? Well I think in order to judge you have to take stats into account and your vision as well. With our eyes who was the best all around offensive talent out of these guys? Does Hull's goal scoring make up for that fact that he wasn't the best playmaker out of these guys? Does Espo's skating hold him back a bit? Does Richard's lack of playmaking hold him back? I think it does, which is why if I had to pick I would choose either one of Jagr or Beliveau.

Put it this way, these guys did everything special when it came to offense. Jagr was a human highlight reel and people forget one thing about Beliveau, watch old tapes of him from back in the day and tell me that he doesn't remind you in a way of Mario, or let's put it this way, Mario reminds you of Beliveau. Now, Mario did it better but Beliveau looked special out there as well. He was like a machine out there. He could beat you so many ways.

Jagr is a close second in my mind in this group and then I would have to throw Hull behind him.

 

[85highlander]

To Big Phil: "I thought that as well. I think we need to entertain the idea that Orr may not be in the top 4 in this category. Let's face it, Orr did everything elite, and that's why he's among the top 4 players of all-time, but if you isolate the offense-only, is it possible to put a defenseman in here? Even Orr?"

-- Yes --

Simply, as stated earlier -- points per game all-time:

1. Wayne Gretzky 1.921
2. Mario Lemieux 1.883
3. Mike Bossy 1.497
4. Bobby Orr 1.393

Defenseman or not -- there is the evidence.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

re: orr in the top four, i think it depends how we define "offense." if offense is brute accumulation of points, then there is an argument orr doesn't fit.

but if by offense we mean all the times orr moved the puck up ice without getting an assist, and how he was by all accounts the overwhelming reason boston led the league in goals every year he played there except the first and last ones, and the ridiculous margins of some of his teams' goals for leads, i think he pretty unmistakably belongs in the top four, even with "only" two scoring titles.

 

[Reds4Life]

I'd say Jagr. Number of Art Ross trophies & incredible longetivity back it up quite well.