Phil Esposito

[JagerMeister]

Phil Esposito, one of the most underrated centers of all time IMO, and deserves far more credit and recognition.

 

    It is easy to conclude without doing an ounce of research that Phil Esposito was just some product of Orr. But if he was really just some good player turned great because of Orr. Explain the 72 summit series. In which he was unarguably IMO, the best player. As well as the hockey writers, who thought otherwise when they decided to vote Phil Esposito as the regular season MVP over Orr twice. Even the players themselves thought Phil Esposito was more deserving of the Pearson over Orr. Twice. How could Phil Esposito be a product of Orr when in some seasons when he,  dare i say might have even outperformed Orr?

 

 

Now i am fully aware Phil Esposito did not impress at all when it comes to the eye test. But since when did a player have to look satisfactory in order to be good? Brett Hull was not particularly exciting, but he still got the job done. All that matters after all, is results. 

 

So my question to you is, would Phil Esposito be a HHOF player without Orr?

 

And a few other questions, Where do you rank him as a forward, a center, and a skater?

[JackStraw]

He was great at what he did best, stand in front of the net and score goals. Big, strong, great hands, great release. Mediocre skater at best. I read a quote where he himself said that his shot "couldn't break a pane of glass". Ok playmaker, generally a smart player. But look at his point totals before and after the Bruins- I don't think he got close to 100 pts. Around a ppg player which is certainly not sucking. He and Orr benefitted from playing with each other- Orr got the puck to the net better than anyone, and Espo cleaned up the "garbage" better than anyone.

[JackStraw]

Would he be in the HoF if he hadn't played with Orr? Maybe, probably a borderline case.

[JagerMeister]

He was great at what he did best, stand in front of the net and score goals. Big, strong, great hands, great release. Mediocre skater at best. I read a quote where he himself said that his shot "couldn't break a pane of glass". Ok playmaker, generally a smart player. But look at his point totals before and after the Bruins- I don't think he got close to 100 pts. Around a ppg player which is certainly not sucking. He and Orr benefitted from playing with each other- Orr got the puck to the net better than anyone, and Espo cleaned up the "garbage" better than anyone.

He was also 33 and past his prime, so there's that. He also won an Art Ross when Orr wasn't even a PPG player. He had 127 points while Orr had 6 something points. So that in itself proves to me he was totally capable of 100 points with or without Orr.

 

And I think his playmaking is vastly underrated as well. The first Art Ross he won, he had 77 assists, again, without Orr being a PPG player.

Here are his Assist finishes

 

Assists 

1966-67 NHL 40 (6)

1967-68 NHL 49 (1)

1968-69 NHL 77 (1)

1969-70 NHL 56 (2)

1970-71 NHL 76 (2)

1971-72 NHL 67 (2)

1972-73 NHL 75 (1)

1973-74 NHL 77 (2)

1974-75 NHL 66 (5)

Career NHL 873 (23)

 

And btw, if someone where to be a product of Orr, you would think they would not outproduce the person that is making them a great player.... It just doesn't add up to me. ( I know you dont think that, im just saying for all the people that do)

[JackStraw]

He was also 33 and past his prime, so there's that.

 

Espo's last year in Chicago he was 24, he had 61 pts in 69 games. Chicago had the best record in the league that year. Three Hawks put up more points than Espo- Mikita (97), Hull (80), and Wharram (65). Next year with Boston (Orr's second year) Espo jumps to 84 pts in 74 games. The following year, at age 26 (Orr's third year), 126 pts in 74 games. So when Espo enters his prime, he's around a point per game player. As Orr enter's his prime, Espo's numbers shoot up dramatically.

 

He had 127 points while Orr had 6 something points.

 

6 points? From 69/70 through 74/75 Orr never had a season with less than 100 pts. In 68/69 (his 3rd year at 20 years old) he put up 64 points and was plus 65. I don't know for sure but I'm guessing that 64 point season set a record for defensemen. Maybe you meant 60-something rather than 6?

 

If you want to see more of the "Orr effect" look at Johnny Bucyk's career: http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/b/bucykjo01.html

 

Bucyk generally played on the 2nd line, the first line was Espo, Cashman, Hodge. Bucyk's best years are all after the age of 30 (32 in fact). What changed in the late '60s for the Bruins when Bucyk should have been on the downside of his career? I've heard both Bucyk and Espo say the same thing- they knew that all they had to do was get to the front of the net and Orr would get them the puck. I saw those Bruins teams in person, it all went through Orr. That doesn't mean that Espo and Bucyk weren't great players, both are in the Hall. But those teams wouldn't have been the offensive machines they were without #4, and imo, they wouldn't have won the Cup either.

[JagerMeister]

Espo's last year in Chicago he was 24, he had 61 pts in 69 games. Chicago had the best record in the league that year. Three Hawks put up more points than Espo- Mikita (97), Hull (80), and Wharram (65). Next year with Boston (Orr's second year) Espo jumps to 84 pts in 74 games. The following year, at age 26 (Orr's third year), 126 pts in 74 games. So when Espo enters his prime, he's around a point per game player. As Orr enter's his prime, Espo's numbers shoot up dramatically.

 

 

 

 

6 points? From 69/70 through 74/75 Orr never had a season with less than 100 pts. In 68/69 (his 3rd year at 20 years old) he put up 64 points and was plus 65. I don't know for sure but I'm guessing that 64 point season set a record for defensemen. Maybe you meant 60-something rather than 6?

 

If you want to see more of the "Orr effect" look at Johnny Bucyk's career: http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/b/bucykjo01.html

 

Bucyk generally played on the 2nd line, the first line was Espo, Cashman, Hodge. Bucyk's best years are all after the age of 30 (32 in fact). What changed in the late '60s for the Bruins when Bucyk should have been on the downside of his career? I've heard both Bucyk and Espo say the same thing- they knew that all they had to do was get to the front of the net and Orr would get them the puck. I saw those Bruins teams in person, it all went through Orr. That doesn't mean that Espo and Bucyk weren't great players, both are in the Hall. But those teams wouldn't have been the offensive machines they were without #4, and imo, they wouldn't have won the Cup either.

Whoops, i ment 60 something points.

Esposito won an art ross when Orr was not even a PPG player.

Bucyk however, never outproduced Orr, Esposito did. More then once.

It just does not seem right to me that someone that was a product of Orr would outproduce the player that is making him great..

No player that is a product of a greater player would outproduce so called greater player. 

[JackStraw]

Bucyk however, never outproduced Orr, Esposito did. More then once.

 

You know that Espo was a forward and Orr was a defenseman, right? Just because Orr was the main guy generating offense doesn't mean that nobody else touched the puck before it got to Espo (or someone else). Or that other players didn't also contribute to Espo's stats (Cashman and Hodge were workhorses digging pucks out from the boards). The Bruins also had Carol Vadnais who was a pretty good offensive defenseman in his own right. The Bruins were an offensive force and it wasn't all due to Orr (even if I kind of said that before).

 

 

 

It just does not seem right to me that someone that was a product of Orr would outproduce the player that is making him great..

 

Nobody claims that Esposito was a "product" of Orr. He was an elite player in his own right. But his stats while on the Bruins were certainly in part a result of playing with Orr. Just like Jari Kurri's stats were also in part a result of playing with Gretzky.

 

 

 

No player that is a product of a greater player would outproduce so called greater player. 

 

I hope you're not arguing that Orr was not in fact the greater player.

[ScottM]

I think VERY highly of Esposito. If he hadn't had Orr, his numbers would not have been as big, but a player as good as Esposito was will still find a way to put up the numbers. I have no doubt he still would've been in the hall of fame. Based simply on his performance on the ice (and, yes, that does include the contributions of Or, et al) I would put him behind only Gretzky and Lemieux as a center. There were a few wingers I'd put ahead of him, such as Howe, Richard, and Hull, but he still ranks highly among forwards. All players? That's crazy tough, but I went top 15 as a best guess estimate.

[JagerMeister]

You know that Espo was a forward and Orr was a defenseman, right? Just because Orr was the main guy generating offense doesn't mean that nobody else touched the puck before it got to Espo (or someone else). Or that other players didn't also contribute to Espo's stats (Cashman and Hodge were workhorses digging pucks out from the boards). The Bruins also had Carol Vadnais who was a pretty good offensive defenseman in his own right. The Bruins were an offensive force and it wasn't all due to Orr (even if I kind of said that before).

 

 

 

 

Nobody claims that Esposito was a "product" of Orr. He was an elite player in his own right. But his stats while on the Bruins were certainly in part a result of playing with Orr. Just like Jari Kurri's stats were also in part a result of playing with Gretzky.

 

 

 

 

I hope you're not arguing that Orr was not in fact the greater player.

Lol no im not, but it kinda sounds like it, the way im trying to get my point across. Yes Orr was a defenseman ik...

 

You would be surprised, there are a handful of people who do, not here though.

[blocker]

Phil Esposito and John LeClair played pretty much the same type of game.  They had sticks that were angled snow shovels.  Big guys who muscled their way to the front of the net.

 

But, LeClair did the dirty work of going into the corners and digging out the puck.  Esposito went to the slot and waited.

 

LeClair had Lindros.  They created space for each other.  

 

Esposito had Orr.  If I played with Bobby Orr,  despite my bent ankles, I'd have scored 20 goals.

[notfondajane]

Phil was a cherry picker!:|

[Podein25]

Espo was one of the most overrated guys to ever play in the NHL. He had a good shot I guess. And a knack for scoring I guess.

So did Tim Kerr

[JagerMeister]

Espo was one of the most overrated guys to ever play in the NHL. He had a good shot I guess. And a knack for scoring I guess.

So did Tim Kerr

And Espo did it better than Tim Kerr, whats your bloody point?

[Podein25]

And Espo did it better than Tim Kerr, whats your bloody point?

I rarely have a point, much less a bloody one. Ask anyone.

[ScottM]

I rarely have a point, much less a bloody one. Ask anyone.

 

Points are dangerous. They can hurt you.

[JagerMeister]

Points are dangerous. They can hurt you.

I stab myself with points all the time, they dont hurt at all, in fact, I surprisingly get alot of pleasure from stabbing myself with points....

[JagerMeister]

I rarely have a point, much less a bloody one. Ask anyone.

Ok, i'll ask you again, whats your bloody point?

seriously though, I dont think Esposito is anywhere near overrated, I actually think he is quite overlooked just because of the fact that he played with Bobby Orr, he was not just a product of Orr, he was obviously a great player with or without him

[Podein25]

... he was not just a product of Orr, he was obviously a great player with or without him

I guess my point is that I don't think that is obvious at all.

[jammer2]

  Their frames were different, and Espo scored at more elite clip, but I always thought Dino Ciccarelli was like a shorter version of Phil. The both struggled mightily to keep up skating and both made their living collecting the garbage goals out in front. I hated Espo so much off the ice, that it intertwined into my thoughts of him as a player. Met him once, my suspicions were correct, one of the biggest tools to ever walk the earth.

[J0e Th0rnton]

Watching videos of him, I don't find his skating as bad as advertized for the time. He definitely looks slow compared to Orr in the videos. Everyone does. But Esposito looks "strong" on his skates, for lack of a better word.

 

The thing about him that impressed me most is his ability to maneuver his stick in close quarters to get a good shot off. He could have 2 guys around him trying to tie him up, and somehow whip his stick around, shortening his grip and pulling it in close to avoid getting his stick tied up and whipping it back down in a split second as he kicked the puck into position, and BOOM. Puck is in the net. Such quick reaction time compared to others when the loose puck was within reach.

[JagerMeister]

  Their frames were different, and Espo scored at more elite clip, but I always thought Dino Ciccarelli was like a shorter version of Phil. The both struggled mightily to keep up skating and both made their living collecting the garbage goals out in front. I hated Espo so much off the ice, that it intertwined into my thoughts of him as a player. Met him once, my suspicions were correct, one of the biggest tools to ever walk the earth.

Why did you hate him so much off the ice?... and how was he "one of the biggest tools to ever walk the earth"?

Watching videos of him, I don't find his skating as bad as advertized for the time. He definitely looks slow compared to Orr in the videos. Everyone does. But Esposito looks "strong" on his skates, for lack of a better word.

 

The thing about him that impressed me most is his ability to maneuver his stick in close quarters to get a good shot off. He could have 2 guys around him trying to tie him up, and somehow whip his stick around, shortening his grip and pulling it in close to avoid getting his stick tied up and whipping it back down in a split second as he kicked the puck into position, and BOOM. Puck is in the net. Such quick reaction time compared to others when the loose puck was within reach.

did you count how many of his goals were because of Orr? 

 

[JackStraw]

He definitely looks slow compared to Orr in the videos. Everyone does. But Esposito looks "strong" on his skates, for lack of a better word.

 

He was slow compared to everyone. But yes, he was strong- very strong on his skates.

 

The thing about him that impressed me most is his ability to maneuver his stick in close quarters to get a good shot off. He could have 2 guys around him trying to tie him up, and somehow whip his stick around, shortening his grip and pulling it in close to avoid getting his stick tied up and whipping it back down in a split second as he kicked the puck into position, and BOOM. Puck is in the net. Such quick reaction time compared to others when the loose puck was within reach.

 

I think he is overrated for the most part, but not that part. He was probably the best I've ever seen at that stuff. Great hands and a fantastic ability to get the puck on and off his stick and on goal. Like the bumper sticker said, "Jesus Saves and Espo scores on the rebound".

[blocker]

Met him once, my suspicions were correct, one of the biggest tools to ever walk the earth

 

I've also met him.  Condescending and self-absorbed.  

 

Made unflattering comments about his teammates that were "supposed" to be humor, but were in fact digs.  He's the guy who said that Bobby Orr couldn't skate backwards.  

[flyercanuck]

@blocker

 

Well if someone would know about not being able to skate backwards it would be Espo.