Lidstrom or Orr

[Aznknight 139]

If you could sign one of them during this off season which one would you take? They're asking for a 10 year/ $95 million deal.

A little twist. Orr is 30 and Lidstrom is 25. Orr did not have his career ending injuries. Datsyuk has not been signed yet either.

You have the current Wings team with the current cap space.

I pick Lidstrom. He provides a sense of confidence in the back end during momentum swings and when it counts. Orr is number 2 to Gretzky in dominating a game but I believe Lidstrom trumps that by cancelling out their performance with his defensive prowess.

Edited June 24, 2013 by Aznknight

[Guest Kronstantinov]

Orr is the greatest hockey player ever.

[wingedominance13 112]

Both. And id only play 2 defenseman the entire game. As for salary cap issues I suppose I would have to go with a series of cheap young talent to fill out the forwards. Like 12 entry level co tracts. But think about that d pairing...

[unsaddleddonald 357]

Serious question: what were Orr's actual defensive abilities like?

My impression of him as always been he was a forward who played defense (Sergei Fedorov). Was he a Karlsson/Letang?

[achildr1 255]

Serious question: what were Orr's actual defensive abilities like?

My impression of him as always been he was a forward who played defense (Sergei Fedorov). Was he a Karlsson/Letang?

I'm a little curious of that too but I don't remember ever hearing anything even remotely bad about his defence.

[Dave 324]

Am I the only person here who thinks that Orr would not be able to score at all in today's game? Seriously, most of his goals were garbage. He was allowed to just skate around the O zone without anyone laying a body on him. Nobody blocked shots back then like they do today. Finally, goalies have improved a s*** ton since the '70s.

[achildr1 255]

Am I the only person here who thinks that Orr would not be able to score at all in today's game? Seriously, most of his goals were garbage. He was allowed to just skate around the O zone without anyone laying a body on him. Nobody blocked shots back then like they do today. Finally, goalies have improved a s*** ton since the '70s.

Its stuff like this that makes comparing players from different eras very hard. I think Orr would still be good but not otherworldly dominating good. Orr revolutionalized hockey for defenseman, he was a great skater, scorer, and he would fight. He was Wayne Gretzky on defense.

Your right though. The game has become incredibly more refined, coached, and defended. I think its starting to settle into the zone where it won't change much anymore without large rule changes because they've really exploited out the games deficiencies. That said, Lidstrom played during the end of the freewheeling era, the dead puck era, and the post cap era. His most clear dominance though was during the dead puck era when some teams top scorer would have 55 points. This guy was putting up 70 from defence without rushing the puck like Orr. He did all this while being the best defensive defenseman in the game with little to no physical game...I believe he was the best ever during the most refined era of hockey to date.

Edited June 24, 2013 by achildr1

[Guest The Axe]

Serious question: what were Orr's actual defensive abilities like?

My impression of him as always been he was a forward who played defense (Sergei Fedorov). Was he a Karlsson/Letang?

Orr was fantastic in his own end. Picture a blend between Paul Coffey at his finest and Nick Lidstrom at his finest. That's Bobby Orr at his finest.

[number9 3,297]

Orr was fantastic in his own end. Picture a blend between Paul Coffey at his finest and Nick Lidstrom at his finest. That's Bobby Orr at his finest.

Couldn't Orr not skate backwards?

Edited June 24, 2013 by number9

[Guest Johnz96]

Orr was fantastic in his own end. Picture a blend between Paul Coffey at his finest and Nick Lidstrom at his finest. That's Bobby Orr at his finest.

Throw in some Girrardi, Carkner and Konstantinov because he blocked shots, he fought and hit with the best of them.

In the 72 Summit Series Canada had to cheat to win. Bobby Orr was injured. The Canadians easily won the 76 Canada Cup and Orr dominated the tournament.

Am I the only person here who thinks that Orr would not be able to score at all in today's game? Seriously, most of his goals were garbage. He was allowed to just skate around the O zone without anyone laying a body on him. Nobody blocked shots back then like they do today. Finally, goalies have improved a s*** ton since the '70s.

Goalie Equipment has become so much bigger since Bettman became commissioner.

[Z Winged Dangler 2,082]

Different eras....too loaded a question. It would be better to have a comparison question in same eras, like Lidstrom vs Niedermayer and Konstantinov vs Stevens. Things like that with similar styles. Not just which of the 2 best Dmen of all time would you rather have questions, cause their careers had an ending and beginning gap of 15+ years. The game changed too much to compare them. Would you like Maurice Richard or Wayne Gretzky? Same deal.

[Dave 324]

Goalie Equipment has become so much bigger since Bettman became commissioner.

That's part of it, but they're also much more athletic. Lateral movement is an actual thing now, not just standing around until it's time to stack the pads.

[achildr1 255]

That's part of it, but they're also much more athletic. Lateral movement is an actual thing now, not just standing around until it's time to stack the pads.

Butterfly goaltending basically didn't exist in the 70's, pads were very heavy and small, and goalies were ENCOURAGED to stay standing and not to go down. Couple that with a near complete lack of defensive and positioning structure at the time and you have a recipe for the unheard of point production of the 70's and 80's. Simply put...Lidstrom putting up 70 plus points in 2000 is like Orr putting up 115 or more in the early 70's. Except Lidstrom did it without rushing the puck like a forward...even if Orr was better, I don't think its near as far apart as some people will tell you.

[martinezsvsu 240]

to young to have watched orr so how the hell should i know

[Guest Johnz96]

That's part of it, but they're also much more athletic. Lateral movement is an actual thing now, not just standing around until it's time to stack the pads.

They used to actually have to make a lot of saves rather than just play the angles and let the puck hit them or fall into their huge cavernous gloves. They used to have to challenge shooters, poke check actually make great glove saves. The goalie equipment was less flexible and much heavier back then too.

Edited June 24, 2013 by Johnz96

[Dave 324]

They used to actually have to make a lot of saves rather than just play the angles and let the puck hit them or follow into their huge cavernous gloves. They used to have to challenge shooters, poke check actually make great glove saves. The goalie equipment was less flexible and much heavier back then too.

Goalies these days actually know how to go down and get back up in a timely fashion. They don't just lay on their back flailing their legs around hoping to miracle a save.

It seems like 50% of the highlights from that era involve the goalie comically over-committing, and not being able to recover.

[Uncle Danny 155]

to young to have watched orr so how the hell should i know

Came here to post something similar. The number of people here who are qualified to answer this question is likely incredibly low. I'm 40 and have been watching hockey most of my life, and there is no way I can give an informed opinion based on firsthand experience. I'm guessing that I skew older than most posters here, to boot.

[kipwinger 8,493]

Goalie Equipment has become so much bigger since Bettman became commissioner.

Oh here we go again. Here's three pictures, one from a goalie today (2013), the next from a goalie the year before Bettman took over (1992), and one from twenty years before that (1972). To me it seems like the size of goalie equipment has changed less in the last twenty years than it did in the twenty before that. So I'm guessing this argument of yours is simply another attempt to blame Gary Bettman for something that you don't happen to like, whether he's at fault or not.

Edited June 24, 2013 by kipwinger

[Hockeymom1960 5,107]

Goalies these days actually know how to go down and get back up in a timely fashion. They don't just lay on their back flailing their legs around hoping to miracle a save.

It seems like 50% of the highlights from that era involve the goalie comically over-committing, and not being able to recover.

Hey now, tell that to Hasek

[Guest Johnz96]

Oh here we go again. Here's three pictures, one from a goalie today (2013), the next from a goalie the year before Bettman took over (1992), and one from twenty years before that (1972). To me it seems like the size of goalie equipment has changed less in the last twenty years than it did in the twenty before that. So I'm guessing this argument of yours is simply another attempt to blame Gary Bettman for something that you don't happen to like, whether he's at fault or not.

Bob Essensa circa 93-94

A few years later with the Oilers. The net (and he is deeper in it even) and even the stick look so much smaller than in the pic above.

Edited June 24, 2013 by Johnz96

[Ally 448]

It's not just the size of the goalie equipment but the size of the goalies themselves that has changed.

I'm also too young to answer this question and the eras are too far apart, too many factors.

[Guest Johnz96]

Oh here we go again. Here's three pictures, one from a goalie today (2013), the next from a goalie the year before Bettman took over (1992), and one from twenty years before that (1972). To me it seems like the size of goalie equipment has changed less in the last twenty years than it did in the twenty before that. So I'm guessing this argument of yours is simply another attempt to blame Gary Bettman for something that you don't happen to like, whether he's at fault or not.

[GMRwings1983 8,793]

If Orr was so bad defensively, how come his plus/minus was so absurdly good? I mean, I realize it's a somewhat overrated stat, but the guy put up insane plus/minus numbers.

It's easy to say that a guy you saw play was better than some other guy you never saw play. People do that with Lebron vs. Jordan comparisons.

But if you're a true student of the game and its history, you'll know from hearing stories about Orr and from looking at his stats, that he was miles above anyone else.

And it's not just talent and performance related. You also have to look at how he changed the game for that position. He paved the way for defensemen like Coffey, Bourque and Leetch to attack more. How has Lidstrom changed the game?

[Guest Johnz96]

If Orr was so bad defensively, how come his plus/minus was so absurdly good? I mean, I realize it's a somewhat overrated stat, but the guy put up insane plus/minus numbers.

It's easy to say that a guy you saw play was better than some other guy you never saw play. People do that with Lebron vs. Jordan comparisons.

But if you're a true student of the game and its history, you'll know from hearing stories about Orr and from looking at his stats, that he was miles above anyone else.

And it's not just talent and performance related. You also have to look at how he changed the game for that position. He paved the way for defensemen like Coffey, Bourque and Leetch to attack more. How has Lidstrom changed the game?

Lidstrom is the 2nd best defenseman I ever saw and it's not even close. Gretzky would never have scored nearly as many points as he did if it wasn't for Orr.

[GMRwings1983 8,793]

Goalies these days actually know how to go down and get back up in a timely fashion. They don't just lay on their back flailing their legs around hoping to miracle a save.

It seems like 50% of the highlights from that era involve the goalie comically over-committing, and not being able to recover.

Except, no one besides Orr put up even remotely as many points back then from the blueline. How come nobody else did that if Orr was just taking advantage of poor goaltending? Is it because there were no other good defensemen back then? Hardly.

This argument is flawed, because to me if a guy dominates his era and is far above others, he's truly amazing and could have succeeded in any era with improved modern day training and equipment.

Same thing with people who say that Wilt Chamberlain only dominated because he was so tall compared to others of his era? Well, how come Bill Russell didn't easily score 50 points a season, since he was really tall too?

Relative to their eras and their competition, Orr was twice as good as Lidstrom. And I'd argue there were more good defensemen in Orr's prime than there were in Lidstrom's, as relative competition.