HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The History of Hockey
The History of Hockey Relive great moments in hockey history and discuss how the game has changed over time.

Messier vs. Esposito

View Poll Results: Esposito vs. Messier
Messier 62 51.24%
Esposito 59 48.76%
Voters: 121. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-23-2012, 07:31 AM
  #76
overpass
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,511
vCash: 500
Esposito's PP scoring was still at a high level in NY. It's his ES scoring that dropped off by a lot.

This trend was starting to appear in his last year in Boston, so age probably had something to do with it. But I think it also points to the fact that Espo was a great player in the offensive zone - maybe one of the best forwards ever there - but was nothing special in transition. As a result he excelled on the power play, and while playing with Bobby Orr (who's presence on the ice was almost as good as a power play.)

overpass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 09:18 AM
  #77
BM67
Registered User
 
BM67's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: In "The System"
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,565
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
Phil, the Bruins were Orr's team already in 68

Orr in 46 games compared to Phil's 74 was on for 99 TGF (113 for Phil).

So Phil is on the ice for 14 more goals in 28 more games.

In 69 Orr plays in 67 games to Phil's 74.

TGF is 164-163 for Phil, yes that's right he was on the ice for only 1 more goal for than Bobby in 7 more games.

Jean Ratelle who is 2 years older than Phil and was involved in the trade for Phil as well does better than Phil in his post Orr days.

After the trade

Jean 419-155-295-450
Phil 422-184-220-404

There is just overwhelming evidence that Phil's huge peak in Boston relies alot on Bobby Orr and that he might have been a very good player but not the superstar that he looks like with the Bobby Orr affect.
Defensemen led their teams in TGF 70% of the time from 67-68 through 70-71.

Pat Stapleton blew Mikita and Hull away a couple of times (160-132-126 & 161-129-103). Was he the straw that stirred the drink in Chicago?

There's no doubt that Orr was the straw that stirred the drink in Boston, and he certainly inflated Esposito's point totals. But since Esposito finished 2nd in scoring in 67-68 (15 points ahead of his nearest teammate), when Orr missed 28 games (46 GP, 31 Pts), it's rather strange to think he was that much dependent on him that he couldn't be a regular top 10 guy without him.

BM67 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 03:27 PM
  #78
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,017
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
You're right. Unless it is a defenseman he's leeching from. then, it's completely different.

There is just so much more opportunity for a forward to be "involved" in a goal than there is for a defenseman. Orr just generated so many goals with his outstanding possession game, even if he wasn't always getting points on them. His "percentage of goals on ice participated in" is 55%, not significantly higher than some other offensive defensemen. Phil Housley, for example, is 51%.
But we're talking about Bobby Orr here. This is a defenseman who won the Art Ross twice. He is basically one of the most offensively dominant players to ever play the game - including forwards. We aren't talking about Housley or even Coffey. We are talking about Orr here, the man who carried the puck like no one else. It does have some merit that Esposito could still outscore him because no other forward in the NHL could, as we saw.

Quote:
I agree, a leech would not win a deserved MVP award over the player he's leeching from
It isn't that it couldn't have gone to Orr, but the voters that witnessed that season put Orr after even Parent on the Hart voting, so there is always a reason.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Killion View Post
... yepp. Pretty strange one my opinion on this subject might be to most Im afraid. Lots of people looking at me like Im nuts, heresy for even suggesting it, but frankly, they had the wheels, the skills, the pure talent, depth, team unity & pride, a genius in Bowman behind the bench, Pollock upstairs and the best Scouts in the league working for them. I think we got gypped in 72 Phil. Id have much preferred seeing the free wheeling, highly creative Habs playing it clean & flat out against the Soviets rather than a team of out of shape ill prepared disparate All Stars playing desperate; Coached by a guy who didnt cotton on to the most effective way to stop the Red Machine until late into Game 4.
Well, to be fair the 1972 team had.................Cournoyer, both Mahovlich brothers, Dryden, Savard and Lapointe. They were stacked with Hab players as it was. Granted the 1975-'76 team did perform well in that New Year's Eve game

Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Yes, Espsosito stands on his own merits. But when it is a question of how he stacks up in comparison to a top-25 player of all-time, the Orr factor has to be discussed. Esposito's record of scoring finishes, for example, cannot be taken at face value, as though he'd have done that with or without Orr.
Well I did the chart a while back there and it almost seems as if no one really realizes just how dominant Esposito was in comparison to the rest of the NHL. So let's pretend to take Orr out of the entire NHL. He never exists. Esposito does. Therefore the point totals of Bucyk and Hodge would drop as well. So let's compare where Esposito is each Art Ross year to the next best non-Bruin.

1969 - Esposito 126, Hull 109
1971 - Esposito 152, Hull 96
1972 - Esposito 133, Ratelle 109 (63 games)
1973 - Esposito 130, Clarke 104 (Orr misses 15 games)
1974 - Esposito 145, Clarke 87
1975 - Orr 135, Esposito 127, Dionne 121

Alright, we see by 1975 he is slowly starting to drop a bit and age will do that to you. In the beginning of the 1975-'76 season he had 16 points in 12 games before the Bruins ship him to the Rangers. Over a full season that's 107 points had he maintained that pace. It is very early so it could have gone either way but I hardly doubt even if Esposito is a Bruin that whole year with a healthy Orr that he is getting a 61 goal 127 point season like in 1975. He was starting to fall, the Ranger trade just sped it up and he still had 83 points.

Now, those Art Rosses tell a lot. Perhaps a healthy Ratelle combined with an Orr-less Esposito force him to lose that one. Perhaps. 1969 is another one that has "potential" in losing it to Hull. Then again, Esposito nearly won the Art Ross a year earlier with a sophomore Orr.

Other than that, he wins as clear as day in 1971, 1973 and 1974 at the bare minimum. No way does Esposito surrender 56 points without Orr in 1971 and 58 in 1974. Just not possible.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
He is perhaps between a very good to excellent goal scorer without Orr and quite probably, almost definitely not an elite one without the Orr affect IMO. There is simply too much evidence to suggest this.

From the stats before and after Bosotn (Orr)and the indication of the Orr affect it's also quite likely that he never reaches those heights and wins zero Art Ross trophies as well.

He might win 1 , if everything goes perfect in an Orr less career but it's more likely that he wins zero rather than 2 Art Ross trophies IMO.
You are criminally underrating an all-time great. My chart just above shows that Esposito clearly would have won at least 3 Art Ross trophies and if by any chance he loses the other two, he is still 2nd. You've got him winning zero Art Rosses and I just can't comprehend that at all.

Look, the pieces fit in well with Esposito. He is old post-Orr and young pre-Orr. He never wins an Art Ross without Orr but he was a power forward and everyone knows just how difficult a bigger guy can adjust to the game. The evidence shows that not only was he winning these Art Rosses but he was spanking the competition in the process.

I also wonder how many people watch actual footage of Esposito. Somewhere along the way he got this reputation as a guy who stood in front of the net and waited for Orr to bounce pucks in off of his leg. Watch a prime Esposito, that guy controls the pace of the game like few have ever done, and in my opinion certainly better than even Messier. He is a perennial puck carrier, not just a garbage goal scorer. He had great hands, long reach, great hockey sense and even better anticipation. The guy was in the NHL for 17 years and no one could find a way to stop him from scoring goals from the slot.

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 03:38 PM
  #79
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,017
vCash: 500
I'll say another thing too. The 1972 Canada/Russia series should be the straw that breaks the camels back for anyone arguing Esposito was dependant on Orr. I urge people to watch that series on DVD. It's there. Esposito had 7 goals and 6 assists in 8 games. 4 points in the final game. 3 points in the final period. Easily the best player in the tournament for either team and the emotional leader for Canada.

In an intense series with immense pressure we saw Esposito score 1.62 points per game which would have given him 127 for a full season. Granted it is a small sample size, but he was playing against Russia and a Hall of Fame goalie with Hall of Fame talent and he didn't have the California Seals to pad his stats with.

Let's also look at that Canadian team in 1972. Lots of Hall of Famers there. None were even close to matching Esposito's impact and stats other than Henderson. You would think Ratelle, or Mahovlich or Cournoyer would show him up and we'd see how brittle he was without Orr but they didn't. For whatever reason that is never enough proof for people on here.

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 04:19 PM
  #80
Czech Your Math
Registered User
 
Czech Your Math's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: bohemia
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 3,373
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil View Post
1969 - Esposito 126, Hull 109
1971 - Esposito 152, Hull 96
1972 - Esposito 133, Ratelle 109 (63 games)
1973 - Esposito 130, Clarke 104 (Orr misses 15 games)
1974 - Esposito 145, Clarke 87
1975 - Orr 135, Esposito 127, Dionne 121

Now, those Art Rosses tell a lot. Perhaps a healthy Ratelle combined with an Orr-less Esposito force him to lose that one. Perhaps. 1969 is another one that has "potential" in losing it to Hull. Then again, Esposito nearly won the Art Ross a year earlier
with a sophomore Orr.

Other than that, he wins as clear as day in 1971, 1973 and 1974 at the bare minimum. No way does Esposito surrender 56 points without Orr in 1971 and 58 in 1974. Just not possible.
I think he wins at least 2... maybe he wins 4, I can't say with certainty. Either way, he's still on a stacked Bruins team (even w/o Orr) in a weak/diluted league, and look at his competition: an early 30s Hull past his peak (and playing a bit more constrained?), an injured early 30s Ratelle, and Clarke. This wasn't just weak, I'd say it was historically weak. You'd have to go back to the early-mid 50s or perhaps the '02-'04 & '11-'12 seasons (although there was a lot of high end depth and opportunity in the latter two periods) to find competition that was nearly this weak IMO.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil View Post
Alright, we see by 1975 he is slowly starting to drop a bit and age will do that to you. In the beginning of the 1975-'76 season he had 16 points in 12 games before the Bruins ship him to the Rangers. Over a full season that's 107 points had he maintained that pace. It is very early so it could have gone either way but I hardly doubt even if Esposito is a Bruin that whole year with a healthy Orr that he is getting a 61 goal 127 point season like in 1975. He was starting to fall, the Ranger trade just sped it up and he still had 83 points.

Look, the pieces fit in well with Esposito. He is old post-Orr and young pre-Orr. He never wins an Art Ross without Orr but he was a power forward and everyone knows just how difficult a bigger guy can adjust to the game. The evidence shows that not only was he winning these Art Rosses but he was spanking the competition in the process.
His '75 season and beginning of '76 with Boston aren't that far out of line with, for example, his '73 season. Sure, he had likely peaked and age was likely causing him to become slightly less productive, but many of his teammates (Hodge, Cashman, Bucyk, etc.) were becoming substantially less productive with age too.

I don't think the pieces fit neatly at all with Espo. I know players often started their careers later in the O6, but he was 22-25 in the '65-'67 seasons, and I don't see how he really separated himself from fellow Chicago forwards Wharram and Mohns. If Espo may have been a bit on the young side then, those two were definitely on the old side then, being in their early-mid 30s. It's not that his production increased in Boston... it went through the roof and stayed there for basically his complete tenure with the Bruins. Then he was traded to the Rangers and he didn't gradually decline with age, rather he immediately had a huge drop off and basically stayed around that level for his remaining full seasons in NY. His career curve has to be one of the most puzzling of any elite forward with a fairly long career. It wasn't so much of an arc, as a steady line at one level in Chicago, a discontinuous gap to a much a higher level in Boston which then was relatively steady from '69-75, and another very large gap lower upon reaching NY, where it was again steady back near his pre-Bruins level.

What's difficult is that there's evidence on both sides, but in many cases (OHA-Jrs., international play, games in Boston w/o Orr) the sample sizes are too small and/or mostly irrelevant to reach much of a conclusion. When combined with his extremely strange career "curve" (including a rather late peak), his mostly disadvantageous adjusted plus-minus data, historically weak competition, the Bruins being an offensive juggernaut with Orr, and a dynamic but diluted league full of disparity between teams, it makes fitting all the pieces together much more complex than for almost any other elite forward IMO. I respect your view, and hope you can understand mine as well, but I don't mean to mislead anyone to believing that that the puzzle is simple. I don't post such an unusual amount regarding Espo because I want to bash him or dislike him, but because it's such a tangled web that I find difficult to completely unravel, and I suspect many others may have the same difficulty.


Last edited by Czech Your Math: 11-23-2012 at 04:24 PM.
Czech Your Math is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 04:33 PM
  #81
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,550
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil View Post
But we're talking about Bobby Orr here. This is a defenseman who won the Art Ross twice. He is basically one of the most offensively dominant players to ever play the game - including forwards. We aren't talking about Housley or even Coffey. We are talking about Orr here, the man who carried the puck like no one else. It does have some merit that Esposito could still outscore him because no other forward in the NHL could, as we saw.
Think about what you're saying here. No forward who wasn't in Orr's team could ouscore him. A forward on his team, benefitting from his unparalleled possession game, could. Nothing is guaranteed but the fact that Hull, Ratelle, Clarke, etc, did not outscore Orr when on other teams, does not in any way prove that they couldn't or wouldn't (like Esposito did) if they were on the same team as him.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 04:41 PM
  #82
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Pacific NW
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,042
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil View Post
Well, to be fair the 1972 team had Cournoyer, both Mahovlich brothers, Dryden, Savard and Lapointe. They were stacked with Hab players as it was. Granted the 1975-'76 team did perform well in that New Year's Eve game.
... ya, it was to some degree stacked, however, I just happen to believe (and remember they won the SC spring 73) that we'd have been in for a treat of epic proportions beyond what we did enjoy had the Hab's simply changed uniforms for this particular series, constituted a "Real Team" in representing Canada. They more than any other NHL team had the personnel & coaching to have IMO really done on a number on the Russians, guys like Lafleur & Shutt ascendant, Houle, Lapperiere, Lambert, Bouchard & Larose, Henri Richard etc etc.

I think Dryden wouldve found himself playing with a lot more confidence, and though perhaps a controversial suggestion, had he found himself in trouble, I dont think Bowman wouldve had any problem in throwing in Michel Plasse, a smaller, more mobile type crossover hybrid who given the opportunity could seriously surprise & stun the opposition. A guy with plenty to prove, and we've seen over the years how guys like that can rise to the occasion, from Sawchuk to Mike Smith this past spring in Phoenix. Montreal also had Wayne Thomas of course, however, I think Bowman if a change in net was required wouldve gone with Plasse, Thomas a big man, pretty much pure stand-up, but none the less, options. Indeed, Pollock & Bowman mightve even called up Larocque (and Larry Robinson) from Nova Scotia etc.

Killion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 05:08 PM
  #83
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,017
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Think about what you're saying here. No forward who wasn't in Orr's team could ouscore him. A forward on his team, benefitting from his unparalleled possession game, could. Nothing is guaranteed but the fact that Hull, Ratelle, Clarke, etc, did not outscore Orr when on other teams, does not in any way prove that they couldn't or wouldn't (like Esposito did) if they were on the same team as him.
We are just talking about some insane seperation here. Not 10 points year to year but we are talking about sometimes 50 points. Ratelle was relatively close in 1972 and Clarke was "sort of" close in 1973 and Hull in 1969. Other than that it's almost embarassing. That's a lot of separation there and from just an individual basis I can't see the argument that Clarke and Ratelle were close to Esposito offensively even just by watching them play on the ice.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Czech Your Math View Post
I think he wins at least 2... maybe he wins 4, I can't say with certainty. Either way, he's still on a stacked Bruins team (even w/o Orr) in a weak/diluted league, and look at his competition: an early 30s Hull past his peak (and playing a bit more constrained?), an injured early 30s Ratelle, and Clarke. This wasn't just weak, I'd say it was historically weak. You'd have to go back to the early-mid 50s or perhaps the '02-'04 & '11-'12 seasons (although there was a lot of high end depth and opportunity in the latter two periods) to find competition that was nearly this weak IMO.

His '75 season and beginning of '76 with Boston aren't that far out of line with, for example, his '73 season. Sure, he had likely peaked and age was likely causing him to become slightly less productive, but many of his teammates (Hodge, Cashman, Bucyk, etc.) were becoming substantially less productive with age too.

I don't think the pieces fit neatly at all with Espo. I know players often started their careers later in the O6, but he was 22-25 in the '65-'67 seasons, and I don't see how he really separated himself from fellow Chicago forwards Wharram and Mohns. If Espo may have been a bit on the young side then, those two were definitely on the old side then, being in their early-mid 30s. It's not that his production increased in Boston... it went through the roof and stayed there for basically his complete tenure with the Bruins. Then he was traded to the Rangers and he didn't gradually decline with age, rather he immediately had a huge drop off and basically stayed around that level for his remaining full seasons in NY. His career curve has to be one of the most puzzling of any elite forward with a fairly long career. It wasn't so much of an arc, as a steady line at one level in Chicago, a discontinuous gap to a much a higher level in Boston which then was relatively steady from '69-75, and another very large gap lower upon reaching NY, where it was again steady back near his pre-Bruins level.

What's difficult is that there's evidence on both sides, but in many cases (OHA-Jrs., international play, games in Boston w/o Orr) the sample sizes are too small and/or mostly irrelevant to reach much of a conclusion. When combined with his extremely strange career "curve" (including a rather late peak), his mostly disadvantageous adjusted plus-minus data, historically weak competition, the Bruins being an offensive juggernaut with Orr, and a dynamic but diluted league full of disparity between teams, it makes fitting all the pieces together much more complex than for almost any other elite forward IMO. I respect your view, and hope you can understand mine as well, but I don't mean to mislead anyone to believing that that the puzzle is simple. I don't post such an unusual amount regarding Espo because I want to bash him or dislike him, but because it's such a tangled web that I find difficult to completely unravel, and I suspect many others may have the same difficulty.
No it's fine. I'm not on the history board so that we can re-enact an episode of "My Three Sons". We can disagree and in many cases it is almost better when people do with sports. That's the beauty of it.

As for the weakness of the era, well, I guess we tend to penalize Lidstrom for that very reason to an extent and it is true Esposito busted out at a time when Howe was winding down. Hull and Mikita weren't altogether old either though. Mikita wasn't 30 until 1970. Hull was 30 in 1969. That leaves the likes of Ratelle and Clarke as the next best competitors. Lafleur and Dionne didn't bust out until 1975, same with Perreault. You can say it was a perfect storm, but even Lafleur or Dionne didn't crack more than 136 points. Lafleur peaked at 136 while Dionne peaked at 135 overall. Both were elite goal scorers and elite overall offensive players.

In the other Esposito thread there was a well done sampling that showed just how Esposito did without Orr in Boston and there is still no shadow of a doubt that he's the best goal scorer in the NHL by a noticeable degree. So while we can't expect Hull and Mikita to rack up the points that Esposito did in the since they were playing in the lower scoring more conservative 1960s, I think we can point to the fact that Dionne, Lafleur, Bossy, Trottier, etc. didn't touch Esposito's totals and not until a kid named Gretzky came along did that become a reality.

So in that sense there is lots of evidence that suggests that Esposito was just as offensive as Lafleur. The thing is (and I think this always hurts Esposito) is that he wasn't as flashy as other players. He wouldn't skate end to end like Lafleur or Orr. But there are few players in hockey history that were as effective. That's the thing we should judge Esposito with, substance not necessarily style.

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 05:35 PM
  #84
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Pacific NW
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,042
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil View Post
No it's fine. I'm not on the history board so that we can re-enact an episode of "My Three Sons".
Catchy theme song that. Fred MacMurray, Chip, the old sheep dog; Uncle Charlie who I was convinced was an absolute reprobate after dark. Brewed his own Grain Alcohol out in the garage, cleaning his cache of handguns well into the wee hours.

Killion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 05:43 PM
  #85
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,550
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil View Post
We are just talking about some insane seperation here. Not 10 points year to year but we are talking about sometimes 50 points. Ratelle was relatively close in 1972 and Clarke was "sort of" close in 1973 and Hull in 1969. Other than that it's almost embarassing. That's a lot of separation there and from just an individual basis I can't see the argument that Clarke and Ratelle were close to Esposito offensively even just by watching them play on the ice.
Except that the evidence provided in the other thread strongly suggests that Orr's presence was worth about 0.33 points per game to Espo, which is about 27 per season, and that's a bare minimum and before you consider the territorial edge he provided. Without Orr, the play is in Boston's end a lot more when Espo's on the ice, than it otherwise was.

I agree that it looks like Espo could still have won a ross without Orr, perhaps 2 or 3, but the margins wouldn't have been so great. And I know you don't think quantity matters, but it does. Part of his legacy is how many titles he won, and also the margins he won them by. That changes drastically without Orr. Put Orr on one of five other teams, and it's quite possible that their best forward wins a couple Art Rosses in the 1970s as well.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 05:45 PM
  #86
Czech Your Math
Registered User
 
Czech Your Math's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: bohemia
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 3,373
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil View Post
As for the weakness of the era, well, I guess we tend to penalize Lidstrom for that very reason to an extent
It's less clear cut and more subjective with d-men, so I think Lidstrom tended to get the benefit of the doubt when they voted for the Norris. He faced very deep competition, but the similarity with Espo was that it seemed to mostly be lacking at the very top. The difference is that Lidstrom had such a long prime and his career spanned the end of the "golden era" in the early-mid 90s, the explosion in European/Russian players, the DPE, and the post-lockout NHL. During that time he also had variation in defensive pairing, teammates, etc. Meanwhile, Espo's value is mainly related to his Boston years, when he was just about always playing with Orr on a powerhouse team in an ever-expanding NHL, which had a large disparity between teams, no Euros/Russians, and became diluted by the WHA.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil View Post
and it is true Esposito busted out at a time when Howe was winding down. Hull and Mikita weren't altogether old either though. Mikita wasn't 30 until 1970. Hull was 30 in 1969. That leaves the likes of Ratelle and Clarke as the next best competitors. Lafleur and Dionne didn't bust out until 1975, same with Perreault. You can say it was a perfect storm
I would definitely say it was a perfect storm, not just in competition, but in regards to expansion, the resulting disparity and dilution, playing on a stacked Boston team with Orr & Co., etc.

Hull and Mikita were still very good players at the start of expansion, but they weren't really their old selves for most of that period (and Hull left for the WHA).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil View Post
but even Lafleur or Dionne didn't crack more than 136 points. Lafleur peaked at 136 while Dionne peaked at 135 overall. Both were elite goal scorers and elite overall offensive players.
That's true, but they also weren't playing with Orr, although Lafleur certainly had a stacked team and Dionne mostly had very capable linemates. The NHL stabilized a bit starting in '76, as it stopped expanding and scoring actually dropped in each of the three seasons '76-'79. It was still a diluted league with very few Europeans, but it was a bit tougher for top players to score points than in Espo's peak years. I'm not saying Espo couldn't have hit similar heights in those years, esp. with Orr, but it wouldn't have been quite so easy IMO.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil View Post
In the other Esposito thread there was a well done sampling that showed just how Esposito did without Orr in Boston and there is still no shadow of a doubt that he's the best goal scorer in the NHL by a noticeable degree. So while we can't expect Hull and Mikita to rack up the points that Esposito did in the since they were playing in the lower scoring more conservative 1960s, I think we can point to the fact that Dionne, Lafleur, Bossy, Trottier, etc. didn't touch Esposito's totals and not until a kid named Gretzky came along did that become a reality.

So in that sense there is lots of evidence that suggests that Esposito was just as offensive as Lafleur. The thing is (and I think this always hurts Esposito) is that he wasn't as flashy as other players. He wouldn't skate end to end like Lafleur or Orr. But there are few players in hockey history that were as effective. That's the thing we should judge Esposito with, substance not necessarily style.
The sample of Espo's games in Boston without Espo is very small, and nearly half of that is in '68 when Orr at least was not yet in peak form. Even including '68 is less than a full season's worth of games, yet we have multiple season of Espo w/o Orr on each side of Espo's career when he wasn't in Boston, and these suggest a very substantial difference from his years in Boston. How much of that was due to 1) Orr's presence/absence, 2) his other teammates in Boston, 3) being on a powerhouse in a league with great disparity, 4) the league being more difficult after '75 and esp. pre-expansion, and 5) Espo being "too young" or "too old" is debatable, but the massive difference in production is obvious.

You're probably right about "style vs. substance" and I agree Espo shouldn't be unnecessarily penalized for being simply effective. However, Espo is relatively unique in having produced at such a high level without having some of the elite level skills of other elite forwards. Of course scoring "ugly goals" can be done in any era, but how many such players have scored points at anywhere near the level of Espo? Again this speaks to his unique abilities, but it also speaks to the perfect storm in a number of ways which encompassed his peak/prime IMO. He's similar to Gretzky in that neither was always as flashy as you might expect from their numbers, but there was never any doubt that Gretzky was driving the bus from the start to the finish of his career, while that's part of the riddle we're trying to solve with Espo.

Czech Your Math is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 07:10 PM
  #87
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,010
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil View Post
But we're talking about Bobby Orr here. This is a defenseman who won the Art Ross twice. He is basically one of the most offensively dominant players to ever play the game - including forwards. We aren't talking about Housley or even Coffey. We are talking about Orr here, the man who carried the puck like no one else. It does have some merit that Esposito could still outscore him because no other forward in the NHL could, as we saw.



It isn't that it couldn't have gone to Orr, but the voters that witnessed that season put Orr after even Parent on the Hart voting, so there is always a reason.



Well, to be fair the 1972 team had.................Cournoyer, both Mahovlich brothers, Dryden, Savard and Lapointe. They were stacked with Hab players as it was. Granted the 1975-'76 team did perform well in that New Year's Eve game



Well I did the chart a while back there and it almost seems as if no one really realizes just how dominant Esposito was in comparison to the rest of the NHL. So let's pretend to take Orr out of the entire NHL. He never exists. Esposito does. Therefore the point totals of Bucyk and Hodge would drop as well. So let's compare where Esposito is each Art Ross year to the next best non-Bruin.

1969 - Esposito 126, Hull 109
1971 - Esposito 152, Hull 96
1972 - Esposito 133, Ratelle 109 (63 games)
1973 - Esposito 130, Clarke 104 (Orr misses 15 games)
1974 - Esposito 145, Clarke 87
1975 - Orr 135, Esposito 127, Dionne 121

Alright, we see by 1975 he is slowly starting to drop a bit and age will do that to you. In the beginning of the 1975-'76 season he had 16 points in 12 games before the Bruins ship him to the Rangers. Over a full season that's 107 points had he maintained that pace. It is very early so it could have gone either way but I hardly doubt even if Esposito is a Bruin that whole year with a healthy Orr that he is getting a 61 goal 127 point season like in 1975. He was starting to fall, the Ranger trade just sped it up and he still had 83 points.

Now, those Art Rosses tell a lot. Perhaps a healthy Ratelle combined with an Orr-less Esposito force him to lose that one. Perhaps. 1969 is another one that has "potential" in losing it to Hull. Then again, Esposito nearly won the Art Ross a year earlier with a sophomore Orr.

Other than that, he wins as clear as day in 1971, 1973 and 1974 at the bare minimum. No way does Esposito surrender 56 points without Orr in 1971 and 58 in 1974. Just not possible.



You are criminally underrating an all-time great. My chart just above shows that Esposito clearly would have won at least 3 Art Ross trophies and if by any chance he loses the other two, he is still 2nd. You've got him winning zero Art Rosses and I just can't comprehend that at all.

Look, the pieces fit in well with Esposito. He is old post-Orr and young pre-Orr. He never wins an Art Ross without Orr but he was a power forward and everyone knows just how difficult a bigger guy can adjust to the game. The evidence shows that not only was he winning these Art Rosses but he was spanking the competition in the process.

I also wonder how many people watch actual footage of Esposito. Somewhere along the way he got this reputation as a guy who stood in front of the net and waited for Orr to bounce pucks in off of his leg. Watch a prime Esposito, that guy controls the pace of the game like few have ever done, and in my opinion certainly better than even Messier. He is a perennial puck carrier, not just a garbage goal scorer. He had great hands, long reach, great hockey sense and even better anticipation. The guy was in the NHL for 17 years and no one could find a way to stop him from scoring goals from the slot.
It's not as simple as taking Orr out of the equation all of those 5 Art Ross trophies that Phil won were Orr driven.

I don't see any point in removing him from the top scorers but still including his affect on Phil, it just doesn't make any sense.

We have plenty of evidence before and after Orr that supports the fact that yes like BM67 suggests, that he could, probably would, have been a consistent top 10 scorer (there was a bit of a lag of old time stars getting old and new young stars rising to the top in the late 60's early 70's) but that's a huge difference from an 8 year stretch where he was 1st or 2nd.

Hardyvan123 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 07:21 PM
  #88
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,010
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil View Post
I'll say another thing too. The 1972 Canada/Russia series should be the straw that breaks the camels back for anyone arguing Esposito was dependant on Orr. I urge people to watch that series on DVD. It's there. Esposito had 7 goals and 6 assists in 8 games. 4 points in the final game. 3 points in the final period. Easily the best player in the tournament for either team and the emotional leader for Canada.

In an intense series with immense pressure we saw Esposito score 1.62 points per game which would have given him 127 for a full season. Granted it is a small sample size, but he was playing against Russia and a Hall of Fame goalie with Hall of Fame talent and he didn't have the California Seals to pad his stats with.

Let's also look at that Canadian team in 1972. Lots of Hall of Famers there. None were even close to matching Esposito's impact and stats other than Henderson. You would think Ratelle, or Mahovlich or Cournoyer would show him up and we'd see how brittle he was without Orr but they didn't. For whatever reason that is never enough proof for people on here.

No 8 games in that series, which was the 1st time the Russians were playing with hitting and a big guy like Esposito might have an advantage there, is not going to take away all those games with the Black Hawks and Rangers.

Something that always bothers me is the case of two eras of Bruins (Shore's and Orr's) having such great players, I believe Shore played on teams with 5-7 HHOF guys in many seasons, only having 2 SC's.

Shore is put on this high pedestal, as is Espostio (Orr clearly belongs there more than those 2 guys) yet they fail to achieve the ultimate prize as often as one would expect given the number of teams in the league on those occasions. One would think that those Bruin teams of Orr and Espo (often cited as 2 players in the top 10 of all time) and the rest of the cast that gets alot of praise would win more than 2 SC's and their failure to do so might be seen in some less than positive light?

Hardyvan123 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 07:41 PM
  #89
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,010
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil View Post
We are just talking about some insane seperation here. Not 10 points year to year but we are talking about sometimes 50 points. Ratelle was relatively close in 1972 and Clarke was "sort of" close in 1973 and Hull in 1969. Other than that it's almost embarassing. That's a lot of separation there and from just an individual basis I can't see the argument that Clarke and Ratelle were close to Esposito offensively even just by watching them play on the ice.



No it's fine. I'm not on the history board so that we can re-enact an episode of "My Three Sons". We can disagree and in many cases it is almost better when people do with sports. That's the beauty of it.

As for the weakness of the era, well, I guess we tend to penalize Lidstrom for that very reason to an extent and it is true Esposito busted out at a time when Howe was winding down. Hull and Mikita weren't altogether old either though. Mikita wasn't 30 until 1970. Hull was 30 in 1969. That leaves the likes of Ratelle and Clarke as the next best competitors. Lafleur and Dionne didn't bust out until 1975, same with Perreault. You can say it was a perfect storm, but even Lafleur or Dionne didn't crack more than 136 points. Lafleur peaked at 136 while Dionne peaked at 135 overall. Both were elite goal scorers and elite overall offensive players.

In the other Esposito thread there was a well done sampling that showed just how Esposito did without Orr in Boston and there is still no shadow of a doubt that he's the best goal scorer in the NHL by a noticeable degree. So while we can't expect Hull and Mikita to rack up the points that Esposito did in the since they were playing in the lower scoring more conservative 1960s, I think we can point to the fact that Dionne, Lafleur, Bossy, Trottier, etc. didn't touch Esposito's totals and not until a kid named Gretzky came along did that become a reality.

So in that sense there is lots of evidence that suggests that Esposito was just as offensive as Lafleur. The thing is (and I think this always hurts Esposito) is that he wasn't as flashy as other players. He wouldn't skate end to end like Lafleur or Orr. But there are few players in hockey history that were as effective. That's the thing we should judge Esposito with, substance not necessarily style.
I must have missed that where is that thread?

Hardyvan123 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2012, 09:17 AM
  #90
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,017
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Except that the evidence provided in the other thread strongly suggests that Orr's presence was worth about 0.33 points per game to Espo, which is about 27 per season, and that's a bare minimum and before you consider the territorial edge he provided. Without Orr, the play is in Boston's end a lot more when Espo's on the ice, than it otherwise was.

I agree that it looks like Espo could still have won a ross without Orr, perhaps 2 or 3, but the margins wouldn't have been so great. And I know you don't think quantity matters, but it does. Part of his legacy is how many titles he won, and also the margins he won them by. That changes drastically without Orr. Put Orr on one of five other teams, and it's quite possible that their best forward wins a couple Art Rosses in the 1970s as well.
Quantity matters, as I said in this thread (or maybe the other thread) my chart shows that he still has some significant scoring finishes ahead of what would be the second place finisher. Besides, you look at the original chart here in this thread on the OP and you can see it is scattered all over the place and there is actually a time when Esposito scores more without Orr (I think it was 1968). Then the biggest sample size is 1973 when Orr missed 15 games. Esposito was on pace for a 126 point season in comparison to his 130. So really, why is the guy being shortchanged so much?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Czech Your Math View Post
The sample of Espo's games in Boston without Espo is very small, and nearly half of that is in '68 when Orr at least was not yet in peak form. Even including '68 is less than a full season's worth of games, yet we have multiple season of Espo w/o Orr on each side of Espo's career when he wasn't in Boston, and these suggest a very substantial difference from his years in Boston. How much of that was due to 1) Orr's presence/absence, 2) his other teammates in Boston, 3) being on a powerhouse in a league with great disparity, 4) the league being more difficult after '75 and esp. pre-expansion, and 5) Espo being "too young" or "too old" is debatable, but the massive difference in production is obvious.

You're probably right about "style vs. substance" and I agree Espo shouldn't be unnecessarily penalized for being simply effective. However, Espo is relatively unique in having produced at such a high level without having some of the elite level skills of other elite forwards. Of course scoring "ugly goals" can be done in any era, but how many such players have scored points at anywhere near the level of Espo? Again this speaks to his unique abilities, but it also speaks to the perfect storm in a number of ways which encompassed his peak/prime IMO. He's similar to Gretzky in that neither was always as flashy as you might expect from their numbers, but there was never any doubt that Gretzky was driving the bus from the start to the finish of his career, while that's part of the riddle we're trying to solve with Espo.
Well here's the thing with Esposito. I'm not sure a lot of people on these boards actually saw him play. I saw him play. But this can be a moot point if people who are younger would actually watch old game videos of him. Not even just a highlight reel but entire games with him in it. Watch him in playoff years, the 1972 Canada/Russia series, even parts of the 1976 Canada Cup. The guy was definitely "driving the bus" when he was on the ice. It wasn't just "let Orr have the puck and wait for him". Now, was he a better player than Orr? Nobody was so that's a moot point. But was he an integral part every time he was on the ice? You bet. You can see this the way he plays. People that never watched him don't realize just how often Esposito had the puck on his stick. He carried the puck a lot, he really did, and he was good at it as well. But he also had wonderful anticipation and knew when to get in front of he net where he was unstoppable. Did it help having Orr with him? Sure, but it also helped having Cashman dig in the corners and get him the puck in the slot. Esposito knew where to be.

So in my opinion the most notable points are #1 and #5. He missed Orr, but he also was getting older and unless your name is Gordie Howe your production will start to drop in your 30s. Has anyone thought that this might have been the reason they traded Esposito to start with? Doesn't anyone think Sinden realized his star forward was starting to age and he always desperately wanted to get Brad Park from the start? Heck, if Sinden knew this don't you think Esposito was starting to show signs of slowing down then?

Lastly, while it is a small sample size, the time Orr had on Chicago was 26 games with 27 points. Yes his knees were killing him just like we could notice that in the 1976 Canada Cup. However, even someone as great as Orr had to have been missing his old buddy lightening his load because he didn't have anyone to do that anymore in Chicago. Food for thought.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
It's not as simple as taking Orr out of the equation all of those 5 Art Ross trophies that Phil won were Orr driven.

I don't see any point in removing him from the top scorers but still including his affect on Phil, it just doesn't make any sense.

We have plenty of evidence before and after Orr that supports the fact that yes like BM67 suggests, that he could, probably would, have been a consistent top 10 scorer (there was a bit of a lag of old time stars getting old and new young stars rising to the top in the late 60's early 70's) but that's a huge difference from an 8 year stretch where he was 1st or 2nd.
I've seen the evidence and the scoring finishes. I fail to see where Esposito would have lagged behind to become just a regular "top 10" guy rather than a guy constantly threatening the scoring race and still winning it enough times. There wasn't a dominant forward in the NHL like him at that time with or without Orr.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
No 8 games in that series, which was the 1st time the Russians were playing with hitting and a big guy like Esposito might have an advantage there, is not going to take away all those games with the Black Hawks and Rangers.

Something that always bothers me is the case of two eras of Bruins (Shore's and Orr's) having such great players, I believe Shore played on teams with 5-7 HHOF guys in many seasons, only having 2 SC's.

Shore is put on this high pedestal, as is Espostio (Orr clearly belongs there more than those 2 guys) yet they fail to achieve the ultimate prize as often as one would expect given the number of teams in the league on those occasions. One would think that those Bruin teams of Orr and Espo (often cited as 2 players in the top 10 of all time) and the rest of the cast that gets alot of praise would win more than 2 SC's and their failure to do so might be seen in some less than positive light?
First off, even if the Russians never saw a player like Esposito before he still scored 7 goals in 8 games that series. And the NHL saw him all the time and they couldn't stop him either, so I think that's a moot point.

Secondly, those Bruins teams should have won more Cups, I agree. It is a knock you can give Esposito and even Orr (and Shore for that matter earlier). Just one more Cup would have made things prettier. Such as in 1971 or 1974 which was totally possible. In 1975 I've never understood how an Orr/Espo combo could lose to the Blackhawks either. So they could have won more, but they still won two so it isn't all that bad. I liken them to Mario and the Pens who probably could have won at least once more but still have a pair to their name.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
I must have missed that where is that thread?
The thread entitled "Esposito without Orr". Fun stuff.

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2012, 10:19 AM
  #91
Ogie Goldthorpe
Piloted Ogre Hog
 
Ogie Goldthorpe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: NS via BC
Posts: 2,330
vCash: 500
I hate Messier with a passion, but I gotta go with him. As amazing as Espo was, I feel that league quality issues make Messier's accomplishments slightly more impressive. Dammit

Ogie Goldthorpe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2012, 10:59 AM
  #92
DisgruntledGoat
Registered User
 
DisgruntledGoat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,957
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nik jr View Post
high scoring players were selke finalists before '94. gilmour won in '93, with 127p. gilmour also got votes in late '80s and early '90s, as did other 2 way players like larmer or francis. troy murray coincidentally scored 99p, just outside the top 10 in scoring, when he won his selke in '86.

'83: clarke, kurri, gould, lysiak
'84: jarvis, trottier, kurri, middleton
'85: ramsay, jarvis, tonelli, kurri ----- (tonelli scored 100p in '85)


you seem to be focusing on 3 or 4 seasons ('93-'96), when the selke winner scored at least 1.34p per game. in late '90s and prior to the lockout, selke almost always was awarded to a primarily defensive player.

'97: peca
'98: lehtinen
'99: lehtinen
'00: yzerman
'01: madden
'02: peca
'03: lehtinen
'04: draper

selke voting has only been awarded to 2 way players since the lockout. i think several were wrongly awarded, but teams are now regularly using 1st or 2nd lines to check 1st lines. all selke winners since the lockout are used to check scoring lines.


i think it would be unlikely that messier would win a selke. i agree with rabbins that messier was not a great defensive player and that his defensive play is overrated.
I don't want to get into an argument about Selkes and further derail this thread (which has already derailed into a, 'Esposito without Orr' discussion ) but what I'm saying is this: voting for the Selke isn't the best way to gauge a player's defensive abilities, which was the criteria that was initially used to suggest that Messier's defensive play was overrated. I mean, Pavel Datsyuk is tied for second-place with the most ever. Great player, Datsyuk, but does anyone really think he's the second-best defensive forward ever?

I haven't looked into any stats to back me up, but I watched Messier play and I consider him elite defensively. True, the Oilers did tend to ignore the defensive zone during the regular season so he was never consistent but I'd argue that was more about team structure than inability.

The proof, IMO, is there in pressure situations. Like I said before; Keenan had his choice of the best defensive players in the NHL to put out against the KLM line and he went with Messier.

And I just rewatched portions of game four of the 1990 series against the Blackhawks, and the announcers are wondering why Muckler isn't matching Messier up against Savard as he was earlier in the series (and that 1990 Oiler team wasn't the offensive powerhouse it used to be, so the fact that they utilized one of their top scoring forwards in a defensive role tells you something about that player's defensive abilities).

Messier was also used by Sather in the 1984 SCF to forecheck against Potvin and disrupt his breakout plays. Same thing in the 1990 SCF against Bourque. Yes, forechecking the hell out of the opposition's top D isn't necessarily the same as shadowing a top scorer, but Bob Gainey gets a ton of credit for doing exactly that in Montreal. And other than Gainey going up against Orr regularily, can anyone else claim a resume more impressive in that regard than besting both Potvin and Bourque in the Stanley Cup finals?

As two-way centermen go, I consider Bobby Clarke to be in a word of his own. But after that, I put Messier in the second-tier, comparable with Trottier, Mikita.

DisgruntledGoat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2012, 11:39 AM
  #93
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,017
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DisgruntledGoat View Post
The proof, IMO, is there in pressure situations. Like I said before; Keenan had his choice of the best defensive players in the NHL to put out against the KLM line and he went with Messier.

And I just rewatched portions of game four of the 1990 series against the Blackhawks, and the announcers are wondering why Muckler isn't matching Messier up against Savard as he was earlier in the series (and that 1990 Oiler team wasn't the offensive powerhouse it used to be, so the fact that they utilized one of their top scoring forwards in a defensive role tells you something about that player's defensive abilities).

Messier was also used by Sather in the 1984 SCF to forecheck against Potvin and disrupt his breakout plays. Same thing in the 1990 SCF against Bourque. Yes, forechecking the hell out of the opposition's top D isn't necessarily the same as shadowing a top scorer, but Bob Gainey gets a ton of credit for doing exactly that in Montreal. And other than Gainey going up against Orr regularily, can anyone else claim a resume more impressive in that regard than besting both Potvin and Bourque in the Stanley Cup finals?

As two-way centermen go, I consider Bobby Clarke to be in a word of his own. But after that, I put Messier in the second-tier, comparable with Trottier, Mikita.
You're right there. Keenan had many players he could have used against the KLM line and he chooses the Anderson-Messier-Gartner line. Yeah Selke finishes are definitely not the be all and end all of things. It helps but the eye test is just as good. Messier passes that with flying colours.

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2012, 11:55 AM
  #94
thom
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,952
vCash: 500
Again when did Bob Gainey go against Bobby Orr.Bob's first season was 74-75 his rookie year.Gainey was a great forechecker played injured a hall of famer but vastly overated.Look at Guy Charboneau or Claude pronovost and tell me why Gainey gets the upper hand

thom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2012, 12:13 PM
  #95
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,017
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thom View Post
Again when did Bob Gainey go against Bobby Orr.Bob's first season was 74-75 his rookie year.Gainey was a great forechecker played injured a hall of famer but vastly overated.Look at Guy Charboneau or Claude pronovost and tell me why Gainey gets the upper hand
To be fair both Carbonneau and Provost get a little bit of love for the HHOF too so they aren't altogether that far behind Gainey. I guess he gets the nod for being sort of the standard. Not to mention he beat out Lafleur for the Conn Smythe trophy once, as much as I love Carbonneau no one thought he should beat Patrick Roy.

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2012, 12:19 PM
  #96
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,807
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thom View Post
Again when did Bob Gainey go against Bobby Orr.Bob's first season was 74-75 his rookie year.Gainey was a great forechecker played injured a hall of famer but vastly overated.Look at Guy Charboneau or Claude pronovost and tell me why Gainey gets the upper hand
An aging Henri Richard was famous for forechecking Orr, like younger Richard was famous for forechecking Pilote.

I do know that Gainey was known for forechecking the opposing defensemen, but you're right in that his career barely overlapped with Orr's.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2012, 12:28 PM
  #97
DisgruntledGoat
Registered User
 
DisgruntledGoat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,957
vCash: 500
My mistake on Orr-Gainey. I was just trying to think of other situations where a defensive forward would have been deployed to forecheck against a top five all-time defenseman. I just threw that one out there without thinking about it.

DisgruntledGoat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2012, 12:38 PM
  #98
thom
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,952
vCash: 500
Thanks for the response we make errors including numerous by me.

thom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2012, 03:16 PM
  #99
DisgruntledGoat
Registered User
 
DisgruntledGoat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,957
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thom View Post
Thanks for the response we make errors including numerous by me.
In my defense. . . I woulda snuck that one by on the main board. Here, I get called on it like five seconds.

DisgruntledGoat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2012, 01:04 AM
  #100
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,550
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil View Post
Quantity matters, as I said in this thread (or maybe the other thread) my chart shows that he still has some significant scoring finishes ahead of what would be the second place finisher. Besides, you look at the original chart here in this thread on the OP and you can see it is scattered all over the place and there is actually a time when Esposito scores more without Orr (I think it was 1968). Then the biggest sample size is 1973 when Orr missed 15 games. Esposito was on pace for a 126 point season in comparison to his 130. So really, why is the guy being shortchanged so much?



I've seen the evidence and the scoring finishes. I fail to see where Esposito would have lagged behind to become just a regular "top 10" guy rather than a guy constantly threatening the scoring race and still winning it enough times. There wasn't a dominant forward in the NHL like him at that time with or without Orr.
Don't pay too much attention to the small season by season samples provided. Singularly they don't mean much, but together they form a large enough sample to prove that Orr was responsible for boosting Espo's production by a bare minimum of 25%. As I showed in the other thread, if we take Orr out of the picture, Espo's best point finishes become 1-2-2-4-6-6.

I wouldn't call that just a "regular top-10 guy", more like "regular top-6" which would make him, at the absolute bare minimum, a Peter Stastny, except there's also an 11th in 1968, plus two top-10s from Chicago, so no doubt he had the offensive ability to place highly and often. But to place 1st, and often, and by a high amount? No.

Esposito's true ability lies somewhere between the "5 scoring titles at face value" and "completely a product of Orr" crowds. The math I did is rather simple but is grounded in fact and is a greats starting point for a discussion of what he'd have done had Orr not existed.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:50 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.