There's pretty much no debate that as an overall defenceman, Orr > Coffey.
However if we're talking offensive peak only, how do the two compare to each other?
Let's take a look at their offensive peaks. (For fairness purposes, instead of nitpicking their best seasons, i'm going to look at a 6-7 year stretch where they were the most offensively effective).
Looking at the numbers, they're almost identical, however Orr does it in less games. It's unfortunate that Coffey was injured in both 86/87 and 87/88 as that was arguably the height of his offensive peak, and he may have been able to match or even best Orr's record of 6-straight 100 point seasons.
Anyway, if we're strictly talking offensive peak, which of these two had the higher one? (Added a poll option for them being equal offensively).
I think you have to look at it this way...if Orr paid as little attention to defense as Coffey and played the same all offense all the time style.
We are prolly looking at Gretzky/Lemieux like numbers that blow Coffey's out the window.
I think you have to look at it this way...if Orr paid as little attention to defense as Coffey and played the same all offense all the time style.
We are prolly looking at Gretzky/Lemieux like numbers that blow Coffey's out the window.
We all know that Orr was miles better than Coffey defensively.. but do we really need to go back to the "Orr was in two places at once" thing?
Note: This was for an argument of Coffey vs Orr overall, not offensively.
Quote:
Originally Posted by poise
While this is a... less than ideal way to start talking about this... I do want to point out that Paul Coffey is easily the most comparable Defenseman to Bobby Orr that I have seen both in style and in effectiveness.
I feel that Coffey's three peak years were the best years of any non-Orr Defenseman ever, because they were quite easily the closest thing to Orr since Orr and watching him play at that time is the major reason that Coffey is one of my favorite Players and in me ranking him as a top 5 Defenseman (in a class behind Ray Bourque, Doug Harvey, Vyacheslav Fetisov and above Denis Potvin and Red Kelly).
At the time when Coffey was putting up his 120+ point seasons, there was a ton of press about him and Orr; everyone was searching for the next Orr and Coffey came closest.
There were a few people who held the opinion that Coffey was basically around Orr's level at that time. One writer mentioned that Coffey "proved that he is ready to be mentioned in the same breath as Hall of Fame defender Bobby Orr" (Detroit Free Press - May 16, 1985); another wrote: "Entering this season [1985-1986], Coffey had only the legend of Orr in front of him. Now he stands alongside him" (The Record [New Jersey] - April 4, 1986).
Ted Green who got the chance to play with Orr as his teammate and coach Coffey as Assistant Coach of the Oilers remarked "Nobody could've done better, including Himself [Orr]" (Daily News of Los Angeles - October 20, 1985) after a performance against Winnipeg during the 1985 Cup run.
Of course, other people disagreed.
Some said that while the point totals between the two are similar, Coffey played on an incredibly stacked team, thus boosting his totals. I understand this point, but Orr's Bruins are themselves the best candidate for the second best Offensive team in league history. I do agree that Coffey should not exactly be held as Orr's equal in terms of Offensive effectiveness, but as a very close second. I don't think either Orr or Coffey had a lot of "quiet points" in the way that many Defensemen do.
Others made the distinction at the Defensive level. This is one difference I see when comparing what I've seen of Orr to Coffey, but it certainly is not as great as suggested. Orr himself got criticized for his sacrificing Defense for Offense. Harry Sinden himself said: "When Orr played in Boston he could make all the mistakes he wanted - and he made plenty," Sinden says. "The mistakes were overlooked by everyone, me included" (Toronto Star - January 8, 1987).
Both Coffey and Orr played like fourth forwards (ironically, this was used as a compliment to Orr suggesting how he revolutionized Hockey but is frequently brought up as detriment to Coffey and his alleged lack of Defense), and both found themselves caught a lot deep in the Offensive zone when the puck started to go the other way. However, both could and did use their speed to get back in position.
Bobby Orr seemed more Defensively aware than Coffey, but again, it wasn't a big difference. One major deal is that Bobby Orr certainly tried more than Coffey on Defense; Orr blocked a ton of shots, Coffey rarely did.
The biggest difference I saw however, and it's also a big one mentioned in the media too, was Coffey's inconsistency. While by his peak, Coffey had ended his habit of lapsing badly in the second half of the season (he was the best Defenseman of the 1981–1982 season until he became, in his own words, the worst Defenseman from February on), he still suffered inconsistency on a game by game and even shift by shift basis. I didn't see this with Orr (granted I've watched much less Orr than Coffey).
One more stylistic difference between the two is that Coffey was a lot more give and go than Orr, who would handle the puck a really long time. Coffey had this ability though, but given the circumstances of his team and his role, it would be foolish to do so. Ray Bourque, especially early in his career had a real tendency to over handle the puck, and it made a real difference in his Offensive effectiveness as compared to Coffey (both shared a very similar skill set).
Lastly, Coffey did not sustain his level of play like Orr did. Injuries have a ton to do with this, however. Had Coffey been healthy for those two years following his 138 point season, I think his opinion among most would soar. By the time he was in Pittsburgh, he was already on the decline.
To answer your question, Orr would have the better game. He would be more consistent and better Defensively. I will also say that if you couldn't get Orr, than Coffey would definitely be your number 2, and if both were playing at their best, there wouldn't be too much of a dropoff.
We all know that Orr was miles better than Coffey defensively.. but do we really need to go back to the "Orr was in two places at once" thing?
That's not what I said at all.
It's simply that Orr divided his efforts equally between both ends of the ice. If he focused his energies to the same ratio that Coffey did, he would of produced even more.
The being two places at once thing implies that Orr could of increased his offensive totals without his defensive play suffering and I am certainly not saying that.
Orr has a higher points per game over a similar number of games, while playing in a slightly lower era. And while Phil Esposito is an all-time great, he's no Gretzky or Lemieux.
Orr has a higher points per game over a similar number of games, while playing in a slightly lower era. And while Phil Esposito is an all-time great, he's no Gretzky or Lemieux.
Yeah, this. For sure Orr had great teammates, but Coffey had Gretzky, THEN Lemieux, then Gretzky again, and then an incredibly strong Detroit team...
Orr was the engine of his team's offense, Coffey wasn't. Scoring was also a bit lower in the 70s. Coffey would never win an art ross (and not because Gretzky was standing in his way. Gretzky was the only way he got that close), Orr won two.
Orr has a higher points per game over a similar number of games, while playing in a slightly lower era. And while Phil Esposito is an all-time great, he's no Gretzky or Lemieux.
i'm not voting Coffey, I just want to counterpoint you and Rhiessan a little.
Rhiessan - your point is valid, but i haven't seen anyone validate Forsberg or Fedorov as equal to Jagr (for instance) offensively based on this premise. Datsyuk also could likely have won an Art Ross by now by the same theory, but it's speculation, and it's also wrong technically. If the question is offensive peak, that's all that can be looked at. It doesn't matter if the better player was in his own zone more often... because that is precisely what makes him better defensively. If Orr, in this case, played all out offense, and let's say hit 170 points, we would be talking about a completely diffferent Orr, and we would say things like, "man, he was even more offensive than Coffey, AND just as unreliable defensively"
Devil - my value of your opinions is right at the top, so I may not be fully informed here, and i am very confident you know your numbers, but MAYBE you are overlooking one thing: Orr's era was lower scoring WHEN YOU LOOK AT LEAGUE scoring averages. However, the difference between the top 3 teams, and the bottom several is enormous, and has been slowly balancing out since. The average player in 1974 scored less than the average player in 1984, but the average Hab or Bruin got to stomp the ever livin' crap out of Golden Seals, and terrible Canucks, and a New York Islanders team that actually scored less than half of what they let in one year. You know all about expansion.
Like I said, I'm not voting Coffey in this, but, on a strictly offensive basis, it isn't a long shot question... and, although I consider the Oil to be the greatest offensive team to be a dman for, the early 70's Bruins weren't too far off. Guys like Bucyk and Hodge, to me, are behind Kurri and Mess, by a ways even - but when you have as many guys in the top 10 in scoring as the Bruins, it tells me that beating on weak competition balances the numbers nicely with beating on stiffer competition, like the Oilers did. Orr's playoff points per game isn't as insane as his regular season... most people's aren't, but i think it shows that once you had to play the Hawks, Habs, and Rangers more often than the Seals, Canucks, and Islanders.... well, you get it
Orr was the engine of his team's offense, Coffey wasn't. Scoring was also a bit lower in the 70s. Coffey would never win an art ross (and not because Gretzky was standing in his way. Gretzky was the only way he got that close), Orr won two.
that's probably the best way to look at it. although, i think it is remotely close.
i'm not voting Coffey, I just want to counterpoint you and Rhiessan a little.
Rhiessan - your point is valid, but i haven't seen anyone validate Forsberg or Fedorov as equal to Jagr (for instance) offensively based on this premise. Datsyuk also could likely have won an Art Ross by now by the same theory, but it's speculation, and it's also wrong technically. If the question is offensive peak, that's all that can be looked at. It doesn't matter if the better player was in his own zone more often... because that is precisely what makes him better defensively. If Orr, in this case, played all out offense, and let's say hit 170 points, we would be talking about a completely diffferent Orr, and we would say things like, "man, he was even more offensive than Coffey, AND just as unreliable defensively"
I agree to a point but we're talking about D-men here, not forwards.
Orr, unlike Coffey, actually played like a d-man, not a rover, a lot of the time and wasn't thinking offense all the time.
For example, when the Bruin's were up a goal or two, Orr would settle back, defend and control the game as a traditional D-man.
Not saying Orr still wouldn't join in on the offense when an opportunity presented itself but he didn't force it.
Unlike Coffey and the Oiler's in the regular season, who were out to score as many goals as they could 24/7. They never took their offensive foot off the gas and Coffey rarely played as a traditional D-man.
Let me put it another way, it took Coffey playing all out offense all the time to match what Orr did while playing a more balanced style.
I agree to a point but we're talking about D-men here, not forwards.
Orr, unlike Coffey, actually played like a d-man, not a rover, a lot of the time and wasn't thinking offense all the time.
For example, when the Bruin's were up a goal or two, Orr would settle back, defend and control the game as a traditional D-man.
Not saying Orr still wouldn't join in on the offense when an opportunity presented itself but he didn't force it.
Unlike Coffey and the Oiler's in the regular season, who were out to score as many goals as they could 24/7. They never took their offensive foot off the gas and Coffey rarely played as a traditional D-man.
Let me put it another way, it took Coffey playing all out offense all the time to match what Orr did while playing a more balanced style.
ya, true. I guess you nearly have to view Coffey as a forward, really. I don't expect anyone to vote Coffey in this, but, offensively, he wasn't ridiculously behind Orr. On a side note, Coffey might just barely crack my top 10 defensemen, and he might not. I like guys who play D.
I actually think it was pretty close offensively. But like others have pointed out, Orr was definitely better on defense. If I were ranking offensive Dmen on a scale, Orr would be 10, Coffey would be 9, and I'm not sure anyone else was ever close enough to them to even be a 7, let alone an 8. The gap after them is huge. Coffey was better on D than some people make him out to be, but that doesn't mean he was good. He was average at best, but often inconsistant, and maybe slightly above average in the playoffs, where he did seem to try a lot harder in his own end. Orr was far more consistant.
i like your scale. i agree that the gap between Coffey and the rest is far greater than the gap between him and Orr. I would have Potvin, Bourque, Housley, Leetch, MacIniss in your 7-8 range
I actually think it was pretty close offensively. But like others have pointed out, Orr was definitely better on defense. If I were ranking offensive Dmen on a scale, Orr would be 10, Coffey would be 9, and I'm not sure anyone else was ever close enough to them to even be a 7, let alone an 8. The gap after them is huge. Coffey was better on D than some people make him out to be, but that doesn't mean he was good. He was average at best, but often inconsistant, and maybe slightly above average in the playoffs, where he did seem to try a lot harder in his own end. Orr was far more consistant.
Are we still talking about peak here?
I really don't think Leetch, Housley, Potvin, Bourque and MacInnis are that far behind Coffey offensively. None of those guys ever played with Gretz or Mario. Housley is the only Dman to score 20 goals in 6 straight seasons, and he did it with teams that were below average offensively.
Coffey is a clear 2nd when it comes to offense from the defense. There isn't a lot of wiggle room to put him with Orr. Now, there was a poll done a while ago on who was the better skater. I picked Coffey.........but barely. That is a very good debate. But Orr controlled the pace of the game better than Coffey, no doubt.
Could Coffey have ever won an Art Ross? If you want to get down and dirty, the only time he has a chance to do it is 1995. He had 58 points in that shortened season. Still a far cry from Jagr and Lindros at 70. You'd have to think he cracks over 100 by season's end, but Jagr probably has 125. So that is the closest he ever gets with or without Lemieux and Gretzky. Because even WITH Gretzky, he isn't even close in 1984, 1985 or 1986. He's a lot closer in 1995.
But that's just irrelevant when comparing to Orr. He won two Art Rosses. Once by 21 points. Explain to me how in the world a defenseman does that? You can't. Coffey was brilliant offensively but Orr was on a different pedestal.
I do want to point out that Paul Coffey is easily the most comparable Defenseman to Bobby Orr that I have seen both in style and in effectiveness.
