A healthy Lemeuix and a Healthy Orr may have been better then Gretzky but as it stands Gretzky was so good for so long. Even in his last few seasons he was still top 10 in scoring the leauge.
Its too bad that injuries shortened the other two's carreer but because you can't change history the answer is clearly gretzky
Because everything that you've said about Gretzky is true about Orr.
Nobody has ever dominated the defenseman's position in terms of offense, defense, overall toughness like Orr.
Nobody could change a game in a second like Orr. Before Orr came along it was pretty rare to see a defenseman even cross over the red line with the rare exception. Nobody opened up the game offensively like Orr did from the back line.
Plus Orr could take care of himself on the ice, he didn't need anyone fighting his own battles. When someone roughed him up, he dealt with it.
Orr didn't play in a 21 team league where some goalies were so bad that they had to be tied to the cross bars, where third and fourth lines and bottom pairing defensemen were pulled off of the street and couldn't skate at all.
I like Gretzky, he did amazing things. But to me, there's no comparison to Robert Gordon Orr.
you can't say Gretzky's era had subpar players without mentioning the fact that the 68 expansion brought a ton of sub par players with it as well.
I'll still take Gretzky. As for the "Lemieux was better" argument. no, he wasn't. He didn't put up the numbers. Gretzky played well and was also durable. It isn't his fault Lemieux had injury troubles.
Bobby Orr. No doubt in my mind. He could fight, hit, skate, shoot, pass...he was the most complete player ever. Too bad those moron doctors hacked up his knees or he'd have been even greater.
__________________
Let's get drunk and do philosophy.
If you took a burger off the grill and slapped it on your face, I'm pretty sure it would burn you. - kermitology
Roy not even in the top 10 in my books. Gretzky edges out Orr and then the rest. Mario is not as high as you think because of his shorter career. He is still top 5 though. I would put Messier and Howe right after Grets and Orr. Then Mario followed by some day Brodeur. i put him ahead of Roy..
Roy not even in the top 10 in my books. Gretzky edges out Orr and then the rest. Mario is not as high as you think because of his shorter career. He is still top 5 though. I would put Messier and Howe right after Grets and Orr. Then Mario followed by some day Brodeur. i put him ahead of Roy..
Messier ahead of Lemieux? Are you kidding me?!?!? What reasons?!!?!?
Generational bias is a bitch. I will say "Phantom" Joe Malone who played for the Quebec Bulldogs, Montreal Canadiens, and Hamilton Tigers between 1907-1924.
In 1916-17, Joe scored an astonishing 41 goals in 19 games (2.15 Goals per game). He followed that up in the 1917-18 season with 44 goals in 20 gamse (2.2 GPG).
Joe's assist totals are unfortunately depressed, due to the fact that during that era, there was no such thing as the 2nd assist. Only the immediate passer was awarded an assist.
Between the NHL's predecessor, the NHA, and the NHL Joe played 249 games (20-24 games seasons) with 322 goals and 381 points.
To summarize using 'per game':
Joe Malone Career GPG - 1.29
Joe Malone Career PPG - 1.53
Gretzky's Career GPG (NHL) - 0.60
Gretzky's Career PPG (NHL) - 1.92
Joe Malone was the most efficient goal-scorer to ever play the game. Gretzky's highest single season GPG was 1.18 in 1984, which pales in comparrison to Malone's 2.20 in 1918. Malone's career GPG is over 2 times greater than Gretzky's.
Gretzky was the benefactor of the 2nd assist which was not available to Joe Malone; it would be interesting to see Joe's Career PPG if the 2nd assist was counted then.
My conclusion is that Joe Malone is the greatest of all time.
Generational bias is a bitch. I will say "Phantom" Joe Malone who played for the Quebec Bulldogs, Montreal Canadiens, and Hamilton Tigers between 1907-1924.
In 1916-17, Joe scored an astonishing 41 goals in 19 games (2.15 Goals per game). He followed that up in the 1917-18 season with 44 goals in 20 gamse (2.2 GPG).
Joe's assist totals are unfortunately depressed, due to the fact that during that era, there was no such thing as the 2nd assist. Only the immediate passer was awarded an assist.
Between the NHL's predecessor, the NHA, and the NHL Joe played 249 games (20-24 games seasons) with 322 goals and 381 points.
To summarize using 'per game':
Joe Malone Career GPG - 1.29
Joe Malone Career PPG - 1.53
Gretzky's Career GPG (NHL) - 0.60
Gretzky's Career PPG (NHL) - 1.92
Joe Malone was the most efficient goal-scorer to ever play the game. Gretzky's highest single season GPG was 1.18 in 1984, which pales in comparrison to Malone's 2.20 in 1918. Malone's career GPG is over 2 times greater than Gretzky's.
Gretzky was the benefactor of the 2nd assist which was not available to Joe Malone; it would be interesting to see Joe's Career PPG if the 2nd assist was counted then.
My conclusion is that Joe Malone is the greatest of all time.
Joe Malone was probably the greatest of the pre modern era. IIRC there was also a rover position while he played and it was a penalty if the goalies left their feet.
However it wasn't a penalty to spit tobacco juice in the goalies eyes on the way past
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Hmm. Lets see: More Points, More Cups, More leadership, More Heart, More games played, just to name a few...
More points in alot more games played. Mario's PPG average is way better
More cups I'll give you that, but Glen Anderson has more Cups then Mario as well. Heck, even Cory Stillman has as many as Mario
More Heart? Who came back from cancer 12 points behind Pat Lafontaine and ends up winning the Art Ross trophy by 12 points
More leadership? If you call strong-arming a team to give him a dead guy's number, getting his head coach fired and hiring his buddy, and splitting the dressing room in half a leader, then I guess Mark is a better leader. Oh yeah. And he also ended his career captaining his team to seven straight years of non-playoff hockey.
More games played? You're right Ken Daneyko is much better than Bobby Orr
Joe Malone was probably the greatest of the pre modern era. IIRC there was also a rover position while he played and it was a penalty if the goalies left their feet.
However it wasn't a penalty to spit tobacco juice in the goalies eyes on the way past
This rule was repealed in 1915 or 1916 I believe. I'm not sure about the rover position either, I think that was ousted in the early teens as well.
Orr and Roy are amazing players who dominated their positions helped change the game, but Gretzky is a player that not only changed the game but is known worldwide for what he did for the sport of hockey.
What is amazing is to watch OVI this guy is awsome,bit then watch there is always someone that can match ,another is Mario as per Wayne ,one Heck of a player
I really hate to pick Wayne Gretzky because he used to play for the Edmonton Oilers but hate for the Oilers aside I think Gretzky is by far the best all time NHL player. I have to pick Mario Lemeiux as my second pick. Even though I never seen Gordie Howe played, I will have to pick him as #3.
The year before a beaten up and aging Gretzky retired do you know which NHL players in their prime he was practically tied with in that season? (1 point difference)
I often have the Orr vs. Gretzky argument in my own mind.
On one hand, Orr changed the game and won scoring titles as a defensmen. He was perhaps the most dynamic player to ever play the game and (at the time) looked like a man out there amongst boys.
If you don't know a lot about Orr or are too young to have seen him play I find this highlight package to be a good 'coles notes' type of thing:
(ignore the lame music)
Now, on the other hand, if you're giving Orr the nod over Gretzky, I always have to ask myself this:
What more did Gretzky have to do in order to move ahead of Orr?
Wayne Gretzky holds or shares 61 records listed in the League's Official Guide and Record Book: 40 for the regular season, 15 for the Stanley Cup playoff and six for the All-Star Game.
He also won ten Art Ross trophies and nine Hart trophies.
So again, if he didn't do enough to earn the distinction as the best ever, how much more would he have needed to do?
I am not choosing between the two. I am just pointing out the questions that pop up when trying to rank one over the other.
I would put Orr up there close to Gretzky, but the league was much more watered down when Orr played - it went from 6-12 teams with the new teams made up mainly of minor leaguers. The WHA came along and siphoned off even more talent, and the NHL "brains" refused to recognize the talent playing US college hockey. And the NHL was only beginning to realize that European players might know how to play the game.
By the time Gretzky was in the league, the WHA had folded, with only 4 teams surviving into the NHL; the Europeans were established (except for the USSR), and players from colleges and the National team (e.g. Glenn Anderson) were recognized for their talent. I would say that in the '80's, the league was at its closest to the talent level of the so-called "original 6" that it's ever been since the 1967 expansion. The expansion in the '90's, with no significant new talent pool (probably a contraction) makes today's teams look less strong than the '80's, IMHO
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch
Easy, Orr, he changed the game completely and played against some pretty tough competition, he was well rounded, he was a great defenseman, he was untouchable offensively, and he didn't need anyone to protect him.
Gretzky was a great player, but I felt that the immense watering down of the league inflated his stats by a bit.
