Snake Doctor Posted November 6, 2012 Share Posted November 6, 2012 Unfortunatly I must bring up my amazing goal scoring on ea nhl franchise when I had Bure and Mogilny on the same line. Those were the good ol days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LostViking Posted November 6, 2012 Share Posted November 6, 2012 In all honesty, I would take Bure by himself over Nazzy/Bert or the Sedins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Langdon Algur Posted November 6, 2012 Share Posted November 6, 2012 I love all those mentioned but I think people's age for the most part is showing, as I think alot on here weren't old enough or around to know how good Bure and Mogilny were. If you are talking about "Prime" I can't really see how anyone could choose anything but Bure and Mogilny, my handle aside lol. Pavel Bure lifted people from his seats every time he touched the puck and in his prime was arguably one of the most dangerous scorers of his time. Mogilny was a constant threat, terrific speed and hands and scored 76 goals in this league, how many other guys have done that or better? 3 - Gretzky, Lemiuex and Hull - pretty terrific company to be in (and Selanne and Esposito tied). Now granted we didn't have him that year (76g), but if you're talking Prime...well...hard to argue that... Sedins have grown into stars but did not have the longevity of high scoring seasons, nor did Naz and Bert, very similar. Injuries are all that stopped Bure and Mogilny from being considered all time greats (like Yzerman/Sakic etc). Even with the injuries Bure clearly has with his induction into the Hall of Fame, I think Mogilny would have easily made it without injuries. So all in, I'd say Bure and Mogilny. Two more that should have been added for their greatness as Canucks Sundstrom/Tanti Gradin/Smyl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kacvan Posted November 6, 2012 Share Posted November 6, 2012 Bert and Nazzy also had Mo so they were a trio. I'd go with the Twins or Pinky and the Brain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkeeterHansen Posted November 6, 2012 Share Posted November 6, 2012 I'm going to say the Sedins, for obvious reasons. Consistency, back-to-back Art Ross trophies, the twin aspect...there's so much to love. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Underachieving Hero of CDC Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 The twins for sure. The NHL will never see another pair of players that do what the Sedins do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan Subban Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Hall & Oates.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nowhereman Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 In all honesty, I would take Bure by himself over Nazzy/Bert or the Sedins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LostViking Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 So... you would take one 90-100 point player over two 90-100 players? Okay... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Langdon Algur Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 I would take one of the best players to play the game over two super stars, yes. When I think of the Sedins and of the WCE, they had great success but always had epic clashes against the other forces in the league. In his prime, Bure simply outplayed everyone. I'd rather have that dynamic than a duo that can battle with elite talent and eek out a victory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shawn antoski Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Gillis and Gilman made the canucks an elite organisation but i have to go with the Sedins they have accomplished the most for the Canucks organisation, on and off the ice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vancanfan Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 So... you would take one 90-100 point player over two 90-100 players? Okay... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vancanfan Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 Did Bure or Naslund ever win the Art Ross or Hart? Didn't think so. The Sedins are the two best players this franchise has ever seen period, and quite frankly it's not very close. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bure fan Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 Pinky and the Brain Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grandmaster Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 Does dynamic mean entertaining or dominating? Most entertaining - tied > Bure/Mogilny + Bert/Nassy Most dominant - Sedins Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sugar baby watermelon Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 It would be the Sedins for me, although the other two choices make it a tough choice because they are/were all powerhouses in their prime. Watching the Sedins from their rookie year right to last year & seeing their intelligence in how they play the game just made it a no-brainer for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Langdon Algur Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 Bure played in a era where it was much harder to put up good number, so you have to factor that in, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grandmaster Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 Yet he never won an Art Ross or a Hart Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vancanfan Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 Yet he never won an Art Ross or a Hart Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluesman60 Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 So you're saying that Bure and Mogilny would have Art Rosses if it weren't for Gretzky or Lemieux? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.