Jump to content

Who Is The Second Greatest Boston Bruins Defenseman Of All Time?


JagerMeister

  

9 members have voted

  1. 1. Second Greatest Boston Bruins Defenseman Of All Time?

    • Eddie Shore
      1
    • Ray Bourque
      8


Recommended Posts

Boston has been blessed with three top ten defenseman of all time. We all know who number 1 is, but who is the second greatest Boston Bruins defenseman of all time? Shore or Bourque?

 

 

 

Argument for Eddie Shore

  A defenseman winning a hart has only been done by two other players, and Shore did it 4 times.

It doesnt matter what era you are in, that is a huge achievement. Voters  thought so highly of him they voted him over the best forwards during that era( including Howie Morenz who is widely considered the greatest forward pre 1950s ), and we both know how hart voting is usually very biased towards the forward position. Also important to note that he probably would have won the Norris trophy had it been made every time he was elected for a first team all star, which was 7 times btw.

 

Argument for Ray Bourque

 Whats to say? he won the most norris trophies in two decade which had probably the hardest competition for the Norris ( Chelios, Chelios, Macinnis, Coffey, Howe, Langway, Lidstrom, Stevens, Niedermayer, Leetch, Suter, Murphy, Robinson) to further prove how hard that competition was, once the bolded defenseman where retired, only then did a an early 30s Lidstrom and Niedermayer start winning Norris trophies. Bourque also had the best longevity of any defenseman in hockey history, and was never out of the top ten for Norris voting for his whole career. 6 times a Norris runner up and 6 times in the top 5 for Norris voting

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's hard not to put Bourque at #1.

 

I never saw Bobby Orr, and I know everyone considers him to be #1 all time, but when Don Cherry picks someone as the greatest player ever, I'm immediately skeptical. From what I see in the highlight reels, the closest "modern" comparable to Bobby Orr would be Paul Coffey correct? Well Ray Bourque had the same outrageous offensive numbers that Coffey did, and he was rock solid defensively. Bourque was the total package.

 

It's hard to imagine Bobby Orr being better than Ray Bourque.  :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Orr and Shore never got turned into a pretzel during a Stanley Cup semi-final game, so I have to put Borque at #3. If you're going to be the greatest ever you have to carry your team on your back to a Cup. Borque also didn't do that. Orr did it 3 times, 2 as a Bruin, and in "76 for Canada, on 1 leg.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's hard not to put Bourque at #1.

 

I never saw Bobby Orr, and I know everyone considers him to be #1 all time, but when Don Cherry picks someone as the greatest player ever, I'm immediately skeptical. From what I see in the highlight reels, the closest "modern" comparable to Bobby Orr would be Paul Coffey correct? Well Ray Bourque had the same outrageous offensive numbers that Coffey did, and he was rock solid defensively. Bourque was the total package.

 

It's hard to imagine Bobby Orr being better than Ray Bourque.  :)

 

Having seen them both, I don't have to use my imagination. Orr was better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Orr and Shore never got turned into a pretzel during a Stanley Cup semi-final game, so I have to put Borque at #3. If you're going to be the greatest ever you have to carry your team on your back to a Cup. Borque also didn't do that. Orr did it 3 times, 2 as a Bruin, and in "76 for Canada, on 1 leg.

 

I love that highlight.  :P

 

I thought the Bruins had a great team back in the 70's. :confused[1]:  Bourque's tenure with the Bruins was largely characterized by mismanagement and lean years. After the move to Colorado, he won his first Cup. One wonders how many he would have won playing in Detroit, New Jersey, Colorado, Dallas, or any another powerhouse franchise during that same period. (Imagine Bourque on the New Jersey Devils in the mid-1990's.)

 

The other issue I have is with longevity. Bourque played long enough to get old, and to see the game change radically. He was dominant right up to the end.

 

 

EDIT:  I just looked at Bobby Orr's career stats. 139 freakin points in a season by a defenceman???  :o   915 points in 657 games played? Well so much for that debate....  :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love that highlight.  :P

 

I thought the Bruins had a great team back in the 70's. :confused[1]:  Bourque's tenure with the Bruins was largely characterized by mismanagement and lean years. After the move to Colorado, he won his first Cup. One wonders how many he would have won playing in Detroit, New Jersey, Colorado, Dallas, or any another powerhouse franchise during that same period. (Imagine Bourque on the New Jersey Devils in the mid-1990's.)

 

The other issue I have is with longevity. Bourque played long enough to get old, and to see the game change radically. He was dominant right up to the end.

 

 

EDIT:  I just looked at Bobby Orr's career stats. 139 freakin points in a season by a defenceman???  :o   915 points in 657 games played? Well so much for that debate....  :)

Yea you never really stood a chance.

 

However i will say this, Bourque never going out of the top ten for Norris voting his entire 20 year career is something not even the Great Bobby Orr might have accomplished. So he does have longevity over him. everything else though...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yea you never really stood a chance.

 

However i will say this, Bourque never going out of the top ten for Norris voting his entire 20 year career is something not even the Great Bobby Orr might have accomplished. So he does have longevity over him. everything else though...

 

Yeah pretty much. :)  Bourque's stats season by season are far more pedestrian by comparison. More "steady as she goes" than "OMG".

 

I took a peek at Paul Coffey's career numbers too during this stroll down memory lane. While he hung around for far too long, and didn't play that solid defensively, he had Bobby Orr calibre statistics during his time with the Edmonton Oilers. I knew he was good, but I forgot just how good he was. Perhaps in Paul Coffey, my generation had a good idea of what Bobby Orr would have been like to the previous generation, although when Orr did it, nobody else had played that way before.  :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@JagerMeister  I will go Bourque, but only because I did not see Shore play at all. I've heard great things about Shore, a tough as nails farm boy from Sask....as many great things I have heard about Shore, I do know that Bourque was the whole complete total package.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's hard not to put Bourque at #1.

 

I never saw Bobby Orr, and I know everyone considers him to be #1 all time, but when Don Cherry picks someone as the greatest player ever, I'm immediately skeptical. From what I see in the highlight reels, the closest "modern" comparable to Bobby Orr would be Paul Coffey correct? Well Ray Bourque had the same outrageous offensive numbers that Coffey did, and he was rock solid defensively. Bourque was the total package.

 

It's hard to imagine Bobby Orr being better than Ray Bourque.  :)

I am a huge Bourque fan, but no he did not lol.

 

Bourque had years where he carried the team offensively and MAY have hit those numbers playing with Gretzky and Lemieux like Coffey did, but he never breached 100 points. but yes, he was largely considered one of the best defensive defensemen in the league while leading his team in scoring(Bruins top forwards often had 70 points in an era when others were scoring 130)

 

Largely, those Bruins teams were outgunned and outstarred

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yea you never really stood a chance.

 

However i will say this, Bourque never going out of the top ten for Norris voting his entire 20 year career is something not even the Great Bobby Orr might have accomplished. So he does have longevity over him. everything else though...

Top 10?

 

He was top 4 for the Norris every year of his career until he was 36 and missed 20 games with an injury. 17 straight years.

 

And even then, he never was lower than 7th for the Norris lol.

 

After age 36, he finished 3rd and 2nd for the Norris.

 

In his 3 worst years, facing injury and on a rebuilding team with Joef Stumpel as top forward, he was 7th for the Norris.

 

Let that sink in for a minute.

 

Put him on the red wings and likely they win even more cups than they did with Lidstrom

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am a huge Bourque fan, but no he did not lol.

 

Bourque had years where he carried the team offensively and MAY have hit those numbers playing with Gretzky and Lemieux like Coffey did, but he never breached 100 points. but yes, he was largely considered one of the best defensive defensemen in the league while leading his team in scoring(Bruins top forwards often had 70 points in an era when others were scoring 130)

 

Largely, those Bruins teams were outgunned and outstarred

 

I was thinking more in terms of career numbers. Bourque didn't have the same offensive peak seasons as Coffey, but he produced at a high level for a longer time, finished with more points than Coffey, and played on a Boston Bruins team that didn't really scare anyone during his two decade long tenure there.

 

I guess if you substitute Bourque for Coffey on the Oilers, Bourque would have retired with five or six Stanley Cups and then the conversation changes about how great Bourque was. (According to the media, players are ranked in order from best to worst by how many Stanley Cups they've won.)  :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Top 10?

 

He was top 4 for the Norris every year of his career until he was 36 and missed 20 games with an injury. 17 straight years.

 

And even then, he never was lower than 7th for the Norris lol.

 

After age 36, he finished 3rd and 2nd for the Norris.

 

In his 3 worst years, facing injury and on a rebuilding team with Joef Stumpel as top forward, he was 7th for the Norris.

 

Let that sink in for a minute.

 

Put him on the red wings and likely they win even more cups than they did with Lidstrom

Thats why I said he was never OUT OF THE TOP TEN...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was thinking more in terms of career numbers. Bourque didn't have the same offensive peak seasons as Coffey, but he produced at a high level for a longer time, finished with more points than Coffey, and played on a Boston Bruins team that didn't really scare anyone during his two decade long tenure there.

 

I guess if you substitute Bourque for Coffey on the Oilers, Bourque would have retired with five or six Stanley Cups and then the conversation changes about how great Bourque was. (According to the media, players are ranked in order from best to worst by how many Stanley Cups they've won.)  :D

If that were the case, Henri Richard would be at the top of many peoples list.

That being said, I do believe stanley cups should absolutely not be in the conversation when comparing individual players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If that were the case, Henri Richard would be at the top of many peoples list.

That being said, I do believe stanley cups should absolutely not be in the conversation when comparing individual players.

 

I agree, but the media keeps pushing that silly agenda in the same way that they keep pushing team stats like Wins and Losses for goalies. According to the media, Henri Richard is twice the player Gretzky ever was, and Ovechkin can't ever eclipse Crosby without a Stanley Cup under his belt, etc.  :ph34r: 

 

It does get very tiring when every conversation with the talking heads on SportsNet, TSN, ESPN, etc. goes something like this:

 

"Player X had nine seasons of 60 goals or more per season, and scored more goals than any other player in history............. BUT he never won a Cup in his career. Meanwhile player Y was such a great leader that won multiple championships, so player Y gets my vote for the HOF......"  :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm going with Bourque, but I find it very close. Shore had the four Hart trophies in the 1930s, and was likely the best player of that decade, but Bourque was so good for so long that he makes up for some of that. I've said before that I believe he should have won the Hart Trophy in 1990, and he would have won one in 1987 if not for some guy named Gretzky. Very close.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bourque who could arguably be argued as the number two d-man of all time. Shore seldom is ever taken seriously in that debate So gotta go Bourque. If you factor in that Shore was considered while playing and then even more so as a coach/owner barely human among those who played with him and more so those who played for him, it nudges Raymond one step higher.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eddie Shore was a really colourful guy; the type of character the NHL doesn't have anymore. This is both good and bad because Shore was a great player and, as yave mentioned, quite often a horrible man to be around.

Highlights (some well known, others perhaps less so)

-Shore's brother Aubrey was considered a better prospect than Eddie, but alcoholism (which worsened after their father's suicide) held him back.

-As an NHL rookie (he'd already been playing with and against great players in the WHL, but whatever) his teammate Billy Coutu took an immediate dislike to Shore, and took a run at him during training camp. Coutu was an extremely tough and extremely unhinged player. He'd been paired with Sprague Cleghorn in Montreal, and the two were like peas in a pod. Anyway. After he and Shore came together, Coutu was on his ass, but Shore's ear was nearly severed. Bruins doctors told Shore that there was no saving the ear, so he spent the rest of the day looking for a doctor who thought the ear worth saving. Shore eventually found a doctor and, using a hand mirror, watched his ear be sewn on without the aid of anesthetic.

-He liked to wear a cape during the opening skate, just to get the crowd going.

-In 1929, he missed the team train for a trip to Montreal, and set out to drive through a blizzard with a borrowed limo and chauffeur. They went off the road numerous times, bought two different sets of snow chains, and when the wiper blade froze to the windscreen, he simply removed the top half and was snowed on for the rest of the trip. Shore arrived 22 hours after he set out, thawed out, had a short nap and then scored the game's only goal in a Boston win.

-Shore holds the record for most fighting majors in a single game: 5

-After a fight Shore lost to Buck Boucher (a great puck rushing defenseman), he was so mad, he picked up his stick and butt ended Dave Trottier, who was just standing there watching the fight. The game went downhill from there, and by the end, Shore, Boucher, Trottier and Earl Seibert were sent to the hospital, and the game was delayed some time so the blood could be cleaned up.

-There is, of course, the night he nearly killed Ace Bailey. Still famous. Largely forgotten: right after Shore flipped Bailey over, Red Horner gave Shore a monstrous thrashing.

-Bailey's father was actually ready to kill Shore over what happened, packing a gun and boarding a flight to Boston. Conn Smythe's men intercepted him at the airport, drugged him and put him on a plane back to Toronto.

Shore's period of time as owner of the Springfield Indians is legendary. As a player, he was a general pain in the ass. As an owner, he was a complete tyrant.

-Shore sometimes forced his players to get tap dancing lessons, forcing them to perform in hotel lobbies in hopes of boosting ticket sales. If a player couldn't dance well enough, he was forced to walk the streets with a sandwich board, advertising upcoming games.

-Shore would impose his own way of doing things on his players. The only way to skate was the way that Eddie Shore did it. If a player couldn't or wouldn't adapt, he would tie their legs together with a length of rope to ensure their stride wasn't too long. He was also known to tape players' hands to their sticks if he was unhappy with them.

-Shore was so well known to dispute cab fares, that Springfield cabbies eventually refused any call to the arena.

-After a stretch of poor play, Shore once posted a sign which told the players and their wives to report to the arena the next at 3 pm. The next day (with most of the wives dressed up expecting a party) Shore told the ladies that they'd been giving too much good sex to the players, and it was negatively affecting their performance.

-Don Cherry saw Shore fine a goalie after a shutout win because his legs weren't bent at the right angle during the game.

-He had an odd belief that players should part their hair to the left rather than the right. Who knows why.

-He once kicked a goal judge out of the arena after disagreeing with the official's call.

-If a player negotiated a pay raise, Shore was well known to claw back that money through fines during the season, or would scratch them if they were approaching bonuses. Players were also forced to pay for sticks.

-If the team played poorly, Shore would think nothing of hold a practice immediately after a game, with confused patrons still in the stands.

-After Brian Kilrea broke his jaw, Shore forced him to take part in full contact drills just to see how much pain he could withstand.

-In addition to his role as Owner, President, General Manager, Coach and Captain of the Indians, Shore was also team doctor, and once used a piece of inner tube to patch a player's cut.

-Shore was known to lock referees out of their dressing rooms if he was upset with them.

-If you look up the word "cheap" in the dictionary, there's a picture of Eddie Shore next to it. Players were forced to take tickets, park cars, sell drinks, clean, change light bulbs, hand out programs, and even paint the arena. Shore himself once, in uniform, sold programs until minutes before puck drop.

-He once traded a player to Buffalo in exchange for two nets, and was outraged when the nets weren't new.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@JR Ewing,

Cherry tells a story on the rubber chicken circuit about Shore extending the intermissions by five minutes or so between periods to sell more concessions. When the league got on him about it and threatened to fine him he would have the Zamboni 'accidently' run out of gas on the ice, thus extending the intermission by ten to fifteen minutes while they refueled the Zamboni. That is what Shore was all about. Could he play? Absolutely, a throwback to the true rough and tumble early days of the game when players were chattel and he treated his charges like they were property because that is the world he had come up from. Personally I could do without him. The Ty Cobb of Hockey. That is not a compliment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@JR Ewing,

Cherry tells a story on the rubber chicken circuit about Shore extending the intermissions by five minutes or so between periods to sell more concessions. When the league got on him about it and threatened to fine him he would have the Zamboni 'accidently' run out of gas on the ice, thus extending the intermission by ten to fifteen minutes while they refueled the Zamboni. That is what Shore was all about. Could he play? Absolutely, a throwback to the true rough and tumble early days of the game when players were chattel and he treated his charges like they were property because that is the world he had come up from. Personally I could do without him. The Ty Cobb of Hockey. That is not a compliment.

 

I have said the EXACT same thing. Word-for-word.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bourque who could arguably be argued as the number two d-man of all time. Shore seldom is ever taken seriously in that debate So gotta go Bourque. If you factor in that Shore was considered while playing and then even more so as a coach/owner barely human among those who played with him and more so those who played for him, it nudges Raymond one step higher.
I would argue that's because some hockey fans dont even know who Shore is and his accomplishments, or they just dont take him as seriously because of the era he played in. Sure, he was an ass. But he was the best defenseman for a decade, and won harts over forwards, and goalies (which is rare for a dman) and likely would have won the Norris every time he was a 1st time allstar. He arguably has the peak argument over Bourque
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would argue that's because some hockey fans dont even know who Shore is and his accomplishments, or they just dont take him as seriously because of the era he played in. Sure, he was an ass. But he was the best defenseman for a decade, and won harts over forwards, and goalies (which is rare for a dman) and likely would have won the Norris every time he was a 1st time allstar. He arguably has the peak argument over Bourque

 

I have a hard time voting for a player who played in an era where the talent and skill level throughout the league was limited.  Teams that had a few talented players easily set records left and right.   In a 30 team league like today those records can't be broken, The competition is too great.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a hard time voting for a player who played in an era where the talent and skill level throughout the league was limited. Teams that had a few talented players easily set records left and right. In a 30 team league like today those records can't be broken, The competition is too great.

yes you are most definitely right, I'm not trying to directly compare him to Bourque, because put Bourque in the 30s and he is probably the best player. Im trying to compare them each to how they did against their peers, (only wAY to compare players from vastly different eras imo). And Eddie shore dominated his peers a bit more then Bourque did, and was the greatest player during his time. What Bourque has over Shore is valuable years of longevity in which he never left the top ten for Norris voting his entire career
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...