Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
- - - - -

How did the Canucks Lose so bad then ?


  • Please log in to reply
113 replies to this topic

#91 Riviera82

Riviera82

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,615 posts
  • Joined: 15-February 11

Posted 11 September 2012 - 06:45 PM

as others have posted here 2011 was an anomaly.
this group has shown over the last number of years that they usually make it no further than the second round. we can expect more of the same going forward. they're just not good enough to win it all.


It takes a certain element of luck as well, which the Canucks have never had enough of. Talent-wise I think they're good to go, they just need the hockey gods on their side for once.
  • 0

#92 Gumballthechewy

Gumballthechewy

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,905 posts
  • Joined: 18-April 11

Posted 11 September 2012 - 06:50 PM

Irregardless


???
  • 1

Don't take anything I say seriously! EVER!


#93 Riviera82

Riviera82

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,615 posts
  • Joined: 15-February 11

Posted 11 September 2012 - 06:55 PM

I think we're actually pretty much on the same page.

On a scale between
(cheering everything like it's a cup win) -to- (only a cup matters)

I bet we would both be close to the middle on that scale. I just find the "only a cup matters" frustrating because it excludes so much out that makes being a fan fun. I get tired of people discounting any accomplishments because the Canucks have never won a cup. I realize you aren't guilty of this but there are other people on this board that are.


Absolutely.
I either watch every game on TV or listen to it on the radio. I get excited when we win and upset when we lose, the game experience is something I thoroughly enjoy, reg and playoffs. The only thing I dont like about summertime or lockouts is that there is no NHL to follow.
When the playoffs roll around though and we dont win the Cup, it's a real big-time downer, especially when we get so close like '94 or '11.
  • 0

#94 Wilbur

Wilbur

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,306 posts
  • Joined: 02-December 03

Posted 11 September 2012 - 07:39 PM

as others have posted here 2011 was an anomaly.
this group has shown over the last number of years that they usually make it no further than the second round. we can expect more of the same going forward. they're just not good enough to win it all.

Bruins lost in the first round this year. I guess 2011 was an anomaly for them too. Chicago wins the cup then loses the next year to the Canucks in the first round then to Phoenix the year after that, so was that cup an anomaly? I'm confused.

Yes, chances are the Canucks won't win the cup next year but they still have a chance. Their window is closing but by no means has it closed. Last year wasn't as good as the previous year but just because a team trended downward doesn't mean they can't turn it around. Los Angeles was trending downward in January. They seemed to turn it around successfully.
  • 1

#95 Gumballthechewy

Gumballthechewy

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,905 posts
  • Joined: 18-April 11

Posted 11 September 2012 - 07:49 PM

as for the hall of fame, you get there by carrying your team to a cup.


I don't recall Bure ever winning the Cup...

Edited by Gumballthechewy, 11 September 2012 - 07:49 PM.

  • 1

Don't take anything I say seriously! EVER!


#96 Exarch

Exarch

    K-Wing Regular

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 38 posts
  • Joined: 31-May 12

Posted 11 September 2012 - 08:00 PM

Wow that lineup seems stacked. I've only been paying attention to hockey for five years or so; I regret not getting to see those players back then.
  • 1
Posted Image

#97 winacup

winacup

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 241 posts
  • Joined: 14-July 12

Posted 11 September 2012 - 08:25 PM

Bruins lost in the first round this year. I guess 2011 was an anomaly for them too. Chicago wins the cup then loses the next year to the Canucks in the first round then to Phoenix the year after that, so was that cup an anomaly? I'm confused.

Yes, chances are the Canucks won't win the cup next year but they still have a chance. Their window is closing but by no means has it closed. Last year wasn't as good as the previous year but just because a team trended downward doesn't mean they can't turn it around. Los Angeles was trending downward in January. They seemed to turn it around successfully.


they turned it around because they had better players (and a better coach) than we had.
  • 0
Posted Image

#98 Wilbur

Wilbur

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,306 posts
  • Joined: 02-December 03

Posted 11 September 2012 - 09:30 PM

they turned it around because they had better players (and a better coach) than we had.

In hindsight sure, can't argue, they won the cup, congratulations to LA, they were the better team. How many people would have said that in January? What's to say next year the Canucks players and coach won't be better than LA's players and coach next year?
  • 1

#99 winacup

winacup

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 241 posts
  • Joined: 14-July 12

Posted 12 September 2012 - 09:04 AM

you don't win a cup by hoping your players and coach will outperform the other team(s). you have to assemple a better group of players and coaches than everybody else which is exactly what LA did. they still have a better group than us as do many other teams.

Edited by winacup, 12 September 2012 - 09:04 AM.

  • 0
Posted Image

#100 nuck nit

nuck nit

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,914 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 10

Posted 12 September 2012 - 08:00 PM

they turned it around because they had better players (and a better coach) than we had.


Give me a break.Kesler was hurting and it was known in February he needed surgery.
Daniel Sedin returned from a brain injury to play and almost turn the series around by his addition.
Edler's fingers were still hurt from the previous SCF's and it was said he was contemplating surgery.
Bieksa was said to be suffering a serious groin strain.

If LA had their two top forwards out and two of their top three d men injured mid way through round 1 then LA does not win anything.
  • 1

#101 winacup

winacup

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 241 posts
  • Joined: 14-July 12

Posted 12 September 2012 - 08:30 PM

even if we had all of our guys at 100% LA had (and still has) a better lineup top to bottom than us
  • 0
Posted Image

#102 canucks.bradley

canucks.bradley

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,451 posts
  • Joined: 22-April 07

Posted 14 September 2012 - 07:24 PM

Sorry Juniour
You beeked off big time and were exposed for spewing crap that had no validity :)
Your post was nothing but beeking off, with no substance or accuracy
You really should forget talking about players Maturing, when you haven't yourself

Ouch,The worst post all year ha ha
Who cares,its a post
read it or not
I am not looking for a Pulitzer



i see...well then why did jason garrison explode last season? why did edler go from 20 pts in 2007-2008 to 49pts in 2010-2011?

hmmmm
  • 0
Posted Image
3000th post - September, 2010

K guys I nd hlp fast. Im @ a girls I rly like & txtng from my iphone. I did a #2 in the bathroom and it plugged, water is almost overflowing toilet. Srsly I dunno wut 2 do somebody help!


Watch Bowness somehow mess up Tampa Bay's already amazing 2 powerplay units...he'll probably tell Stamkos to do drop passes from centre ice, take him out from the faceoff dot, and place him infront of the goalie :lol:


#103 canucklehead44

canucklehead44

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,403 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 03

Posted 21 November 2012 - 11:28 PM

That team had some big names but was by no means a good hockey team ON PAPER.

Bure - awesome
Messier - old and playing too many minutes. Still produced at an ok rate but would have been better suited to a second line role with pp time and limited PK time.
Mogilny - spent close to half the season injured.

The craziest part is the minutes those three had to play. Bure/Messier/Mogilny averaged close to or over 3 minutes per game in PK time. Who was the number 4 penalty killer up front? Scott Walker, who averaged 50 seconds per game. Bure played close to 24 minutes per game, Messier close to 23. Noonan average the fourth most minutes at 13:22 per game. (not including Zezel who played only 30 games).

On defense Lumme had to play over 25 minutes per game, and Ohlund over 22 (rookie). Hedican was serviceable, but after him the D was pretty crappy. Aucoin barely played that season (35 games).

The goaltending could have been good. Snow was mediocre and McLean was done, but Irbe played well and Burke was a good goalie who played awful over a short stint.

Aside from all of that the turnover was high (3 coaches over 2 years) and there were a lot of issues in the locker room and with management.
  • 0
Sig too big.

#104 Brodeur

Brodeur

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 105 posts
  • Joined: 08-September 10

Posted 22 November 2012 - 01:11 AM

You know what. Many people consider that to be the dark days of the Canucks. I'm glad i got to be in Vancouver during 96 and got to watch these players play rather than not see them play at all even if it was tough times. I'm thankful to have gotten to love hockey since 96 ever since watching Bure and the Canucks whether they couldn't make the playoffs. I remember watching a highlight where the puck hit McLean's mask while he was partially in the net, and they had to review the goal and it was hard for them to decide whether it was in the net or not since the puck either camouflaged with McLean's mask or his equipment/jersey. I was still in Grade 7 back then, and man, after watching them play, i started playing hockey in my living room by myself with a kinder surprise egg since those were new to me being new to the country back then. I used a metallic coat hanger as the hockey stick because it was small and i didn't have anything else to use. The hanger was great because you could actually wrist the puck(egg) at good heights for top corners etc. And yes, i used to practice goaltending by myself by actually shooting on myself. And i happened to be a pretty decent goaltender later on who went to teach my friend to become a very good goaltender.

So, i'm glad to have watched them during those years.

It is hard to say what was going wrong with the team back then since i was very young. I'd liked to have help you out there. But seems like many people have done so already. I don't remember Bertuzzi joining till later. But i think i remember Keenan not being a very favourable coach back then. I remember Quinn, then Renney, then Keenan. Had no idea what was going on with all the coaching changes back then.

So, for some, it may be the dark era, but to some others out there, it might not be. Just saying, complaining about it doesn't help.
  • 0

#105 frazzY

frazzY

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,390 posts
  • Joined: 02-November 09

Posted 22 November 2012 - 01:15 AM

Well, he did make multiple trades to be able to draft both of the Sedins.


Lol he means sean burke
  • 0

#106 Raoul Duke

Raoul Duke

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,125 posts
  • Joined: 11-April 04

Posted 22 November 2012 - 11:33 AM

I used to be able to get scalper tickets back in those days for like $20-$30 and always moved down. GM Place was a ghost town for those few years.

But what the OP did was just list every player we had that one season, not realizing that those players all weren't on the team at yhe same time.

Also, Keenan/Messier = cancer.
  • 0
FearandLoathingSig.jpg

#107 thema

thema

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,009 posts
  • Joined: 23-June 12

Posted 22 November 2012 - 11:55 AM

Lack of chemistry, heart, determination and a winning game plan.


Just like now.
  • 1

#108 Burnsey

Burnsey

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,811 posts
  • Joined: 08-July 08

Posted 23 November 2012 - 05:45 AM

Sadly I wasn't into hockey at that time, but based on the roster it seems a few players (Naslund, Bert, Ohlund, etc.) hadn't reached their potential yet so I'm guessing that explains a lot.
  • 0

team-canada-jarome-iginla-photo.jpg


#109 Bodee

Bodee

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,257 posts
  • Joined: 26-May 11

Posted 23 November 2012 - 11:40 AM

Because, with respect, it is nearly all dross from Bertuzzi to McLean..............nowhere near the talent required in defence to get to the playoffs never mind the SC Final.
  • 0
Kevin.jpg

#110 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,342 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 26 November 2012 - 05:47 PM

No Structure, we couldn't keep the puck out of our net.
  • 0

zackass.png


#111 Markus Alexander Cody

Markus Alexander Cody

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,640 posts
  • Joined: 25-April 07

Posted 27 November 2012 - 02:39 PM

Let's see... Pavel Bure was not wanting to be in Vancouver by that point, even with the extra minutes under Iron Mike,
Marcus Naslund was not the superstar yet that he became, Gino Odjick's best days were behind him,
Dana Murzyn was still playing like Dana Murzyn, Kirk Mclean had hit the bottle after separating with his wife, the general chemistry on the team was sour, there was no proper system in place and no priority on defense. The games were high scoring with plenty of toughness, but we often wound up the loser.



That... and because at the time, there were way too many other teams that were much better than us. i.e.: Colorado Avalanche, Detroit Red Wings, Dallas Stars, New Jersey Devils to name a few
  • 0

Posted Image

credit to allons-y

Certainly going to be our #1 defensemen. Give him a couple more years to improve his game and he'll be our new and improved version of Matthias Ohlund in no time

Posted Image

^Truth


#112 -Vintage Canuck-

-Vintage Canuck-

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 71,881 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 10

Posted 27 November 2012 - 04:55 PM

If it was 1994 Linden, 1994 Bure, 1994 Messier, 1994 McLean and 2003 Naslund, 2003 Bertuzzi, then I'm pretty sure we would be dominant.
  • 0

307mg00.jpg


#113 Gumballthechewy

Gumballthechewy

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,905 posts
  • Joined: 18-April 11

Posted 27 November 2012 - 05:01 PM

If it was 1994 Linden, 1994 Bure, 1994 Messier, 1994 McLean and 2003 Naslund, 2003 Bertuzzi, then I'm pretty sure we would be dominant.


Dominant?

More like unbeatable.

Edited by Gumballthechewy, 27 November 2012 - 05:01 PM.

  • 0

Don't take anything I say seriously! EVER!


#114 Shift-4

Shift-4

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,452 posts
  • Joined: 11-August 06

Posted 28 November 2012 - 01:32 PM

If it was 1994 Linden, 1994 Bure, 1994 Messier, 1994 McLean and 2003 Naslund, 2003 Bertuzzi, then I'm pretty sure we would be dominant.


I would rather have 1990 Messier
  • 0
Hockey is the only sport, the rest are just games.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.