Quote:
Originally Posted by Orr4
I saw Bourque's entire career... At least in Boston.
Orr by a long shot.
Harry Sinden tried to be diplomatic once in saying he'd take Orr for defense and Bourque for offense, or something like that. Not even close in my opinion.
Orr still gives half the male population of the greater Boston area goose bumps when they see him...
I was watching 'Bones' with one of my kids last night (show sucks by the way) and there was a picture of Orr on the wall in one of the character's office... I nearly jumped off the couch..."HEY!! Thats a pucture of Bobby Orr!!" Best part of the show. |
Yeah but the question isn't IMO who was a better player, that is Orr by a mile, but rather who would you want over an entire career. Orr had 8 productive years, while Bourque had 19.
Again, I'd take Orr because he was SOOOOO much better than everyone else, but I would understand why people would want the guy with the longer upside.