Orr vs Bourque

[clydefrog]

Maybe my opinion is skewed because I saw Ray Bourque play in real life, almost every game he played for the Bruins. I was 6 when Bobby Orr retired so all ive ever seen of him was clips. Orr was DEF the most talented dman, but he played D like no other before him. Dman didnt go coast to coast, or score like him.

I guess my point was that Ray Bourque had the best CAREER for a dman. He is the points leader for dman, yet was also considered a great def dman. He was a great hitter when he the time was right, a great captain and was very underrated for his toughness. IMO Ray Bourque was the most complete dman in NHL history. And for a guy to play the way he did, thru alot of injuries and on some awful Bruins teams for 20 years has to be taken into account. 19 straight all-stars.

Again, IM not taking anything away from Orr, but lets face he didnt play on a regualr basis the same talent level that Bourque did for 20 years. He was so dominate becaue half the league coudnt skate when he played. Goalies were not even close to the levels they are now. Bobby Orr was 20 years ahead of his time.

But I see everyones point. If you feel Bobby Orr was a better player than ray Bourque I can see it that way too. To me though 20 years as either 1-2 best at your position has tp mean something. Remember fans didnt always pick the all-stars, fior the most part it was players and gm who voted.

[flex_buff_chest]

The question is:

Would you take Orr for 9 Seasons or Bourque for 20?

[clydefrog]

Originally Posted by flex_buff_chest

The question is:

Would you take Orr for 9 Seasons or Bourque for 20?

I would take Bourque for 20..

[Jack Schitt]

Originally Posted by flex_buff_chest

The question is:

Would you take Orr for 9 Seasons or Bourque for 20?

Tough question ....

There are pros to each as have been covered .... but I'd have to say Bourque for 20.

[Killah_punk]

Originally Posted by flex_buff_chest

The question is:

Would you take Orr for 9 Seasons or Bourque for 20?

Im going to say Orr cause Bourque couldn't deliver a cup to Boston in his 19 seasons there.

[bruinbrigade]

Originally Posted by Killah_punk

Im going to say Orr cause Bourque couldn't deliver a cup to Boston in his 19 seasons there.

but he brought one to Colorado

[flex_buff_chest]

Originally Posted by bruinbrigade

but he brought one to Colorado

Yes, he was the major cog in THAT wheel.....

I take Orr for 9.

[pens33]

Originally Posted by bruinbrigade

but he brought one to Colorado

Does anyone else think it's ashame, when players sign with a team because they're the best team and it gives them the easiest possible path to a championship? I'd almost rather see a player go somewhere for the money than to do that.

And everyone says "you can't blame him for wanting to win", to which I respond "f*ck that".

[pens33]

Tough call, but I'll take Orr for 9.

[clydefrog]

Originally Posted by pens33

Does anyone else think it's ashame, when players sign with a team because they're the best team and it gives them the easiest possible path to a championship? I'd almost rather see a player go somewhere for the money than to do that.

And everyone says "you can't blame him for wanting to win", to which I respond "f*ck that".

He didnt 'sign with the best team", he was traded to the Av's at the dealine. The Avs won the cup the following year.

[cashman rules]

I'd take orr in 5 seasons rather then the minister of defence!

[pens33]

Originally Posted by clydefrog

He didnt 'sign with the best team", he was traded to the Av's at the dealine. The Avs won the cup the following year.

True. He didn't sign as a free agent, but it's the same principle.

Wikipedia:
Early in 2000, Bourque requested a trade from the fading Bruins so he would have a chance to win the Stanley Cup. [2] Initially, he requested a trade to the Philadelphia Flyers, and Flyers' general manager Bobby Clarke offered the Bruins Andy Delmore and Daymond Langkow for Bourque. In reality, Bruins general manager Harry Sinden was finalizing a trade with the Colorado Avalanche, under the conditions that it could not be leaked to the press. Sinden told Bourque "This may not be your first choice, but this is the team I feel is best." On March 6, 2000, Bourque was traded to Colorado with fellow veteran Dave Andreychuk for Brian Rolston, Martin Grenier, Samuel Påhlsson and a first round draft pick.

[peacemaker]

Originally Posted by flex_buff_chest

The question is:

Would you take Orr for 9 Seasons or Bourque for 20?

Depends on what your ultimate goal is...

Do you want to win the Cup, or do you want to be competitive for 20 years.

Orr got the job done with the B's, and got them the Cup.
No chance the B's win it without him.

Bourque couldn't do that for the same B's.

Bourque won a Cup with the Av's, but you could argue he was the 3rd best d-man on the team (Adam Foote and Rob Blake being the other 2).

[clydefrog]

Originally Posted by peacemaker

Depends on what your ultimate goal is...

Do you want to win the Cup, or do you want to be competitive for 20 years.

Orr got the job done with the B's, and got them the Cup.
No chance the B's win it without him.

Bourque couldn't do that for the same B's.

Bourque won a Cup with the Av's, but you could argue he was the 3rd best d-man on the team (Adam Foote and Rob Blake being the other 2).

Just so you guys know they did have some other guys too you know..

espo, bucyk, hodge,cashman, cheever, green, mackenzie,sanderson,johnston,

if Bourque played with those guys he would have gotten a few cups im sure

[Machinehead2k5]

Since this is in the STATISTICS forum of hockeyfights.com my answer is Bourque.