newfy
Registered User
- Jul 28, 2010
- 14,771
- 8,328
The answer here should be Howe
Because Orr should've been second and Lemiuex 4th
Because Orr should've been second and Lemiuex 4th
How did Lemieux beat Howe for third?How did Lemieux beat Orr for second???
Being the unanimous 4th best of all time is disrespect?
Gretzky
Orr
Howe
Lemieux
Being the unanimous 4th best of all time is disrespect?
It's definitely arguable. We all love Orr, and you can thank Perry Sound for lending him to you, but take your Bruins goggles off. I voted Orr for #2 but I don't think there is any real argument that can put 1 over the other.
Lemeiux was an artist on ice, who has amazing athletic gifts, and put up stats that are absolutely mind boggling.
Orr was a pioneer, and it can be argued that there was never a time where such a huge gap existed between one play and the field. He did something Lemeiux can't claim - he changed the game.
Both are absolute legends that every Canadian child learns about growing up, and will continue to for many eras.
That's just an interesting way of saying old anglo-Canadian people. Many people disagree.Lemieux is the near unanimous 4th best of all-time among people who know hockey history
Orr and Lemieux should have a run off for 2nd. It was so close.
I think most in the History of Hockey have Orr comfortably second.
Wow. That is really telling. That defence is pathetic and the goalie's are twigs. Karlsson would score 300 points