How do today's dmen stack up to the Orr/Potvin/Robbinson era?
View Single Post
03-02-2004, 10:57 AM
Join Date: Jan 2003
Originally Posted by
The fact of the matter is that players get bigger, faster and stronger over time.
Bobby Orr is the best defenseman in history - no d-man has ever been as dominant. But saying that, the players he was so dominant over would also be absolutely destroyed by today's talent. When watching games from the early 70’s (ex. Summit Series), it’s hard not to take notice of the skill level. Like Sampe has noted in his earlier post, the equipment, speed, strength, skill, and tactics of the players are almost laughable by today’s standards. Even simple things like skating mechanics seem pretty primitive.
Now, I still consider Orr the best defenseman in history…….
But I’m thoroughly convinced that if Lidstrom or Pronger were transported back in time to Orr’s era, they’d be every bit as dominant as Bobby was.
I get a kick out of how some people talk like players from years ago were 'so primitive'. 70's players like Potvin and Robinson were playing when Bourque or Stevens were playing in the 80's. Was Bourque or Stevens that much better than Potvin or Robinson? No! Were any of those 4 head and shoulders over the other when their careers overlapped? No! Was/Is Lidstrom/Pronger that much better then Bourque or Stevens? No! Then why do you think the players of today are so
better then the players of yesterday? I've watched both eras and as good as Lidstrom/Pronger are, they aren't no Bourque/Stevens yet. Things have not changed that much in 20 some years. Other than Gretzky being the possible exception, Orr was the most dominant player I've ever seen! If only you could tranport Orr into today.
Lastly, Brad Park was not the prettiest D to watch, but from what people in the know (other players back then) say, he was definitely one of the best.
View Public Profile
Capt Tuttle's albums
Find More Posts by Capt Tuttle