Greatest Canadian Athlete???

[SI]

Feb 25, 2010 13:03:47 GMT -5 Angus Macaulay said:

Personally multiple 200+ point seasons is enough for me to pick Wayne.

Orr was a defenceman. The three players who got more points per game were all forwards.

[spaff]

Feb 25, 2010 12:50:15 GMT -5 gtown said:

Can you have a conversation about the history of hockey without mentioning Wayne Gretzky? No.

Can you have a conversation about the history of hockey without mentioning Bobby Orr? Definitely.

Facts. I'm not saying Orr isn't amongst the very best...but he is at best #2 behind Gretzky.
.

HUH?? ........Let me guess, you and Wetcoast were born in the 70's or early 80's? ....Just saying.

If you are a true fan of the game, you owe it to yourself to spend some time watching old Bobby Orr footage. And, then check out his stats.

[SI]

Feb 25, 2010 12:50:15 GMT -5 gtown said:

Can you have a conversation about the history of hockey without mentioning Bobby Orr?

Of course not unless you want to leave out the player you acknowledge could be the second best. How can you possibly do that?

[gtown]

In a 1 minute conversation, SI.

In the shortest of conversations, Gretzky will always be mentioned. Not Orr.

spaff: are you sure you want to bark up that tree? I'll let you off the hook this time for questioning me as a real fan of the game. I was born in 1985, but you can rest assured that my knowledge of hockey history is more than sufficient. To put it in perspective, I read encyclopedias about hockey, greatest player books, watched old games in my basement on tape...all before I read a single page of a book in school.

[Linc]

Feb 25, 2010 12:50:15 GMT -5 gtown said:

As far as greatest Canadian athlete, I look at it this way: Donovan Bailey was at one time the greatest athlete in the world. He was the Olympic and World record holder in the 100m - probably the most contested sporting event of all time. Can we say this about any other Canadian athlete? No.

Again, facts.

Just because he was the fastest 100m runner in the world, it does not by any means make him the best athlete.
Just as Gretzky/Orr were the best hockey players ever, it certainly doesn't make them the best all around athlete of their era, let alone best athlete of all time!?

Being Extremely good at one thing/sport doesn't make you the best athlete of all time.

I'd say the decathlon record holder is probably a better athlete than anyone mentioned.

[gtown]

Linc, how many people do decathlon in the world?

[SI]

Feb 25, 2010 13:25:31 GMT -5 gtown said:

In a 1 minute conversation, SI.

In the shortest of conversations, Gretzky will always be mentioned. Not Orr.

Not by me and I am not sure what the point of a one minute conversation would be. Seriously, anyone who hasn't mined you tube for Orr clips(maybe you have gtown) no matter what you think of him really should. One of the top ones that pops up is his Hall of Fame video and Lanny MacDonald tells a hilarious story. His end to end rushes and penalty killing are something to watch.


www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1fMcTq8Esk

Look at this one 2:21 in and you will see what Bucyk was talking about when all he had to do was basically stand near the net. I basically burst out laughing at some of the stuff in here:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=MSDw3tMa7ec&feature=related


Nice intro to this one:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yyp8JIhciFg

[coachj]

You could get into a pissing match with every athlete mentioned..There is no 1 greatest athlete.

I think to be mentioned as Canada's" greatest athletes " would be a better ..

99 for sure is in there with Orr and a couple of others, but yet 99 was not an effective coach -
( It is not a given you can be a good coach just because you were good at a sport.. We see it all the time.. )

[mralexmoher]

Tom longboat is up there, he was one of the best if not the best athlete in the world for his time. He smashed any record he could get his hands on.

[Linc]

Feb 25, 2010 13:36:43 GMT -5 gtown said:

Linc, how many people do decathlon in the world?

No Idea. Probably tons have in one way or another. Have you ever run the 400, 100 or 1500? Done Hurdles HJ or LJ? You've probably already done more than half of one. I know I have...
Not exactly the right question though...

The better question would be "How many people have ever run school track in the world?"

You don't start out as a decathlete or sign up for a decathlon league. You start track in general and find out you are really good at a lot of events and then move to the decathlon. There are just very few people who are able to be good enough at all of those events to make it worthwhile doing and training for.
I bet there are more people that have tried a few events of the decathlon in the world than have had the chance to put on skates or hold a hockey stick...

I'm just sayin, if we had to choose our team for a game of pick up basketball, football or something...I'm taking Trey Hardee and Michael Smith over Gretzky and Orr anyday.

[distancemedley]

Greatest Canadian Athlete ever?

it's Steve Nash, case closed

2 time NBA MVP time playing the toughest position in the NBA

and still at 36 years old can do it better then anyone in the league.

[wetcoast]

Bobby Orr did not revolutionize the game, he revolutionalized his position.

Gretz had roughly 90 scoring records. Many still stand.

Gretz made many players around him better.

I know the names Cashman et al...I'm not that young.

I am old enough to have watched Gretzky from 79/80 to the end and watched as many games as possible. People here may have forgotten now how amazing the media was about him. How he was prodded and tested and called psychic of all things. His shots and the arc and how he suspended the high part of the arc for a tenth of a second to throw the goalie's rhythm....no one campares.

[gtown]

I see your point of view, Linc, but I wonder where one would draw the line. Why not take the person who is greatest at all sports and events known to man, but not the best at any one thing? This is why I take my best of the best stance when it comes to defining greatness.

To elaborate, I think the key area of discrepency here is how we define greatness as an athlete (rather than just greatness, which is a fairly simple concept). It then becomes a philosophical argument over what makes a person an athlete (as opposed to sportsman, gamesman, etc.). This can go on for ages. Therefore, the best way IMO to do this is to compare apples to apples. The only way to do that is to take individual achievements as an athlete and the level of competition. In the case of Bailey, there is no Canadian comparison.

[wetcoast]

While Gretzky was scoring 200+ points per-season many at that time said, he is the greatest player of any team sport. If I remember correctly SI had Gretzky, Pele, Jordan and Muhamad Ali...at the same level.

[the bear]

i think it depends how you look at it....is the best player of all time

-the guy was the best stats? - then id say gretzky wins hands down

-is it the best all around player? - orr wouldnt be a bad place to look...messier? second all time in stats great leader

-is it the player that stood out from all other players most in his era? orr?

ill be honest im not a big gretzky fan he put up mind boggling numbers but i think hes a bit of a sham......media made.....hes been riding the coatails of others for his whole career......not saying he wasnt a great player.....but hes had some shady off ice dealings as well

i think you need to include lemieux.....guy was amazing i remember watching some documentary called "the magnificant one"? if you can find it check it out

if its the best all around player then orr beats gretzky for sure......watch those clips....he could score, pass, hit, fight, the guy was diving face first in front of pucks to block shots....he was a f**king animal......how many times did you see gretzky hit? fight? backcheck? defend a teammate?

i think you also need to keep in mind the time period the player was in.......its no coincidence the highest scoring players of all time all played in the 1980's early 1990's.....goaltending wasnt the same and the game was very wide open

the game now is A LOT better than its ever been.....guys like crosby and ovechkin are better players than the game has ever seen.....so many big strong fast players that can do incredible things with the puck......gretzky wouldnt be the player he was if he played in todays game.....not even close

[journeyman]

Feb 25, 2010 12:50:15 GMT -5 gtown said:

Can you have a conversation about the history of hockey without mentioning Wayne Gretzky? No.

Can you have a conversation about the history of hockey without mentioning Bobby Orr? Definitely.

I am on the Gretzky side of the debate, but I don't think this is right. Orr is a very very close second. Anyway, at least as important. SI is right about his contributions to the game.

[SI]

Feb 25, 2010 20:48:15 GMT -5 wetcoast said:

Bobby Orr did not revolutionize the game, he revolutionalized his position.

I see that we are now getting someplace since that is a distinction without a difference and you agree with my position.

[slamer]

Feb 26, 2010 5:03:50 GMT -5 SI said:

Feb 25, 2010 20:48:15 GMT -5 wetcoast said:

Bobby Orr did not revolutionize the game, he revolutionalized his position.

I see that we are now getting someplace since that is a distinction without a difference and you agree with my position.

MJ himself it is very difficult to compare athletes of different eras. That being said, comparisons aren't impossible.

If you took away Gretkzy's goals he would still be the all time leader in points. On top of that, rule changes were made in part because of him, Messier and Coffee. There is a reason no one plays 3 on 3 hockey when multiple penalties are given. Finally the best way to figure out the importance of a player is to take him off that team and see what happens. What happened to Edmonton after the trade. And how far did Gretzky take LA.

I don't personally know enough about Orr to make a comment about him. But what 99 did certainly stick out.

[journeyman]

Feb 26, 2010 18:58:49 GMT -5 slamer said:

There is a reason no one plays 3 on 3 hockey when multiple penalties are given.

I thought that was because of the 1970s Montreal Canadiens power play.

[Tyler Carvalho]

Feb 25, 2010 7:52:23 GMT -5 bbw said:

Feb 25, 2010 0:05:22 GMT -5 trackstar said:

(LA and Edmonton were nothing special before they got him)

I agree that the great on's stats are absolutely insane, but you cant go around saying that messier coffey and kurri were just nobodys on that edmonton team. Sure wayne was the best out there, but he did have significant help from those players and others.

it doesn't matter if wayne had help with those other good players...he's still the best...every star player is going to have good players that make him better...and it didn't matter who he played with he was simply the best

[SI]

You're missing the point. It is how much the players in question raised the level of the game of their teammates. Two words. Ken Hodge. How many 50 goal, 105 point men(in a 76 game schedule) did not make the HOF? Not many. There is a reason for that. Coffey, Messier and Kurri are 3 of the 50 all time best hockey players in the history of the game. They make the HOF with or without Gretzky. Ken Hodge does not and didn't.

[slamer]

Feb 26, 2010 20:27:51 GMT -5 SI said:

You're missing the point. It is how much the players in question raised the level of the game of their teammates. Two words. Ken Hodge. How many 50 goal, 105 point men(in a 76 game schedule) did not make the HOF? Not many. There is a reason for that. Coffey, Messier and Kurri are 3 of the 50 all time best hockey players in the history of the game. They make the HOF with or without Gretzky. Ken Hodge does not and didn't.

One significant knock against Orr is the shortness of his career. Gretzky played at a super high level for almost as long as Orr entire career.

Orr played 9 (relatively) full season + 3 season of 20 or less games (20, 10 & 6)

Gretzky almost played for 11 years average more than 2pts/game (except for one dip to 1.95).

[SI]

Exactly. Making the point. You have already admitted you know nothing about him. I can't believe that you are now weighing in less than two hours later because you did a little googling?

[journeyman]

Feb 26, 2010 20:51:46 GMT -5 SI said:

Exactly. Making the point. You have already admitted you know nothing about him. I can't believe that you are now weighing in less than two hours later because you did a little googling?

Actually, I think the knees are a point against Orr. Injuries are part of the game. Gretzky, in addition to his stats, his leadership, his Cups, his game changing, was surprisingly durable. Orr was physically inferior.

You might say that he did what he did in spite of his knees, but that's just a lot of coulda woulda shoulda. Imagine what he might have done is not a good argument. What did he do? I am not saying Bobby Orr is less than the second or third greatest player of all time. Just not the greatest.

[gtown]

Thank you, John. Longevity is definitely an element of greatness, a very defining one. Otherwise at what level of analysis do you stop? The greatest shift of all time? No. A career twice as long is that much greater.

In running, we have time to determine greatness: faster = greater. But then there are those that say Herb Elliott was the greatest middle distance runner of all time. He doesn't have the fastest times, but was dominant over an extended period of time.

At every level you look at it, Gretzky comes out on top.

Side note: I saw somewhere in the thread that someone said Gretzky would be not as dominant now, not even close. I won't indulge this other than to to say please see Mario Lemieux's comeback from retirement in 2000. Everybody was saying the game had changed, he was too slow and would not be able to compete. 76 points in 43 games later had people rethinking that.

[SI]

Feb 26, 2010 20:58:16 GMT -5 journeyman said:

Orr was physically inferior.

Argue that his career wasn't long enough due to his injuries to qualify as the greatest(I don't think it applies in this case but whatever) but to argue he was "physically inferior" is silly and undermines everything else you are saying. Gretzky was a lot of great things but he was no Adonis. Orr had injury issues because of the great way he played the overall game.

[journeyman]

Feb 27, 2010 5:16:04 GMT -5 SI said:

Feb 26, 2010 20:58:16 GMT -5 journeyman said:

Orr was physically inferior.

Argue that his career wasn't long enough due to his injuries to qualify as the greatest(I don't think it applies in this case but whatever) but to argue he was "physically inferior" is silly and undermines everything else you are saying. Gretzky was a lot of great things but he was no Adonis. Orr had injury issues because of the great way he played the overall game.

Orr's knees couldn't take the pounding, Gretzky's knees could. A narrow point, but an accurate one. The reason why he had injury issues is something to take into account, perhaps, but the fact of the injury remains. The word "inferior" is not a word that can be used to describe Bobby Orr very much, but in comparing his health to Gretzky's, it is accurate.

One might rank Cam Neely or Wendel Clark higher in terms of best ever left-wingers, but you can't because they broke down. Same with Ovechkin: if he ends his career after 8 seasons and Crosby goes for 15, even if Ovie has about 5 goals or so more per year that he played, if Crosby keeps it up, Crosby will have been greater based on being healthier, even if Ovie went down because he's a maniac. And I do think those two players will have to be included in this discussion in about 10 years, btw.

[spaff]

I think what some might be overlooking is the fact that Orr didn't have a weakness to his game (aside from injury). Defence, score, assist, speed, shot, hit, penalty kill...he did it all. And as a defenseman! The same could certainly not be said of Gretzky. Gretzky was great in many parts of the game, but not everything, in same way as Orr.

The thing about Orr is that he could totally control the game single handedly, and at high speed. If he wanted to keep the puck on his stick for an entire shift he could. Watch some highlights and see how he could embarrass and make some of the best in the league (and not a watered down league), look like kids. Orr had it all at high speeds. The ultimate player during his era and all time.

[Roy]

Tough to compare across different eras, but there are indicators like the Hart trophy. Orr won 3. Gretzky owned it in the 80s (minus 1 year).

[wetcoast]

I thought when I pronounced that Gretzky was by far the greatest ever, the discussion was done. ;o)

Orr was great no question. I remember watching video of Orr and thinking, geez, he reminds me of Gretzky, when it came to things like rolling off checks like you do in lacrosse or hanging on to the puck in the offensive zone attracting 2 or 3 opponents to him, leaving team-mates open or putting a pass into seemingly open ice...but where a team-mate would show up eventually. But Gretzky just did it better - all the time.

For those under 35 who didn't get a chance to watch Gretz every week on TV. Every single time he was on the ice - even on his worst shift, there would somehow be a subtle (at the least) legit chance to score. For several years he could throw passes past 3 or 4 people in the air - no look - and have it land on not only a team-mates stick, but the team-mate going the right direction and not in trouble of being checked immediately. I mean even Ovey throws the odd hospital pass or Crosby will throw a pass that looks like it has massive potential, but is 50/50 whether it gets past the first person in the way.

Gretzky and Kurri would practice Passing into each other's skates. So when a pass to the tape of the stick is risky then throw it into the skates and the other would kick it up to the stick. I was at a game and he kept doing odd things like carry the puck in, stop half way down the boards, dish the puck, skate back to the blue line, skate along the blue line and if the Oilers still had possession he would sprint into the slot and zing sharp right, receive the puck and dish it in one motion, then zing back towards the net again. When he was on the blue line and they lost the puck he being a centre already on the blue line he could cover a pinching coffee or just plug up the middle to intercept an attempted pass - covering not one pinching D but anyone out of position, so he could end up anywhere. Very clever stuff. You don't see coaches today allow that and or players attempt that.

Gretz and Sather would come up with all sorts of neat things like put two centres out for a face off, have the inferior purposely get both kicked out of the face off circle, then have the superior centre (in face-offs) take it against their 2nd face-off man) or put 5 forwards on a PP, or take big chances on the kill and score.

Gretz won the cup 4 times and those Oilers could have won 6 - 8 in a row, in fact they kinda-sorta did. Coffey in Pitts, Messier in NY and others. As well Gretz took an inferior LA Kings to the finals 2 years later....one player does not make a team, but Gretz nearly does. I may have a romantized version of the 80's but the ridiculous numbers are there, they tell no lies.