Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
- - - - -

[Report] Canucks MIGHT retire Pavel Bure's #10


  • Please log in to reply
498 replies to this topic

#271 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,024 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 15 November 2012 - 03:15 AM

The guy is a Hall of Famer and the most skilled and electrifying player the Canucks have ever had. That's tough to admit given I'm a huge Naslund fan. Plus, he played here for 7 seasons. If that isn't worthy of jersey retirement, what is?

Hall of Fame has nothing to do with it. That's about a players entire hockey career. Number retirement is about service to a franchise.

Without the significance of a Stanley Cup, I see 10 seasons as a starting point. In addition to 10 seasons there has to be other significant factors. That's my opinion. Btw, saying Bure "played" 7 seasons here is a little deceiving. One was a half season due to lockout and another he only played 16 games. He was a Canuck for 7 years though.

I said this before, nobody is questioning his talent. Had they won the cup in '94, it would make up for the lack of games played here. But I don't see 428 games as above and beyond service to the franchise. Thus there needs to something of great significance to offset that. Isn't that what retiring a number is about...above and beyond service to the franchise? As I've stated, Luongo has more on his resume as a Canuck than Bure does. The two most significant factors to me are length of service and cup wins. Bure has neither. Which in my mind does lower the bar.
  • 0
Posted Image

#272 lowest common denominator

lowest common denominator

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 818 posts
  • Joined: 30-August 06

Posted 15 November 2012 - 09:30 AM

Without the significance of a Stanley Cup, I see 10 seasons as a starting point. In addition to 10 seasons there has to be other significant factors. That's my opinion. Btw, saying Bure "played" 7 seasons here is a little deceiving. One was a half season due to lockout and another he only played 16 games. He was a Canuck for 7 years though. Saying he played only 400 games is more deceiving

I said this before, nobody is questioning his talent. Had they won the cup in '94, it would make up for the lack of games played here. But I don't see 428 games as above and beyond service to the franchise. Thus there needs to something of great significance to offset that. Isn't that what retiring a number is about...above and beyond service to the franchise? As I've stated, Luongo has more chokes on his resume as a Canuck than anyonedoes.

ftfy db


Douche Baggins also said "The real joke here is the fans"

I asume you are talking about yourself.

Everything has been said in this thread and the other one posting the question Retire or RoH?

In that thread, you have quotes from Cliff Ronning, Geoff Cortnall and Pat Quinn regarding Bure's superlative career, most of which was spent with the canucks.You have spent months in that thread railing on against Bure.

There are 1 of 3 things going on here:

1 You have some kind of delusional personal grudge against Bure for some unknown reason

2 You are merely trying to raise the hackles of true canucks fans and don't really believe in the crap that you are spewing

or

3 You work for the Canucks organization and are trying to minimize Bure's impact here and sweep him under the rug due to the Canucks'well founded embarassment about the way their only superstar has been treated since before he even arrived here.

We can agree on one thing, the real joke is the fan here.

So I'll ask you again because you haven't answered the question. What is your motivation?
  • 2

#273 TOMapleLaughs

TOMapleLaughs

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 31,975 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 05

Posted 15 November 2012 - 10:46 AM

7 seasons from our best superstar and a trip to the finals fueled by him.

vs.

10+ seasons from one of our captains and just one playoff round victory in all those years.


Um, i'm taking Option A please.


If Bure was healthy for all those 7 seasons, that's 574 regular season games played as a Canuck. That's more than Brendan Morrison, Tony Tanti, Todd Bertuzzi, Kirk McLean, and Greg Adams, all of whom are known mainly as Canucks.

You'll find that greatness in general, combined with accomplishments, not games played alone, is the main determining factor when it comes to honouring players. That is why people argue that Bobby Orr, not Wayne Gretzky, is the best player of all time, even though Gretzky played almost 1,000 more games than Bobby Orr. You'll find that, just like in Naslund's and Bure's cases, both players are worth honouring in a similar fashion.
  • 0
Posted Image

#274 Pineapples

Pineapples

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,939 posts
  • Joined: 15-June 10

Posted 15 November 2012 - 03:33 PM

Wasn't the rumour for Bure's jersey retirement for it to happen last Monday? Does that mean it won't be happening, or it's still undecided?
  • 0

Pineapple_jumps.gifPineapple_jumps.gif

 


#275 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,092 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 15 November 2012 - 03:37 PM

just do it.
  • 0

#276 TOMapleLaughs

TOMapleLaughs

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 31,975 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 05

Posted 15 November 2012 - 03:43 PM

Last Monday? Was there a game on or something?
  • 0
Posted Image

#277 lowest common denominator

lowest common denominator

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 818 posts
  • Joined: 30-August 06

Posted 15 November 2012 - 04:01 PM

So much has been made about twins/nazzy's so called charitable donations. Is anyone here saying that you can buy your way to the rafters even if your on ice contributions are mediocre but signifigant?

I think its worth taking a closer look at the supposed charitable donations if they are going to be given that much weight.

I've seen the number 5 mil$ bandied about so we'll use that for convenience sake.

If a player (or anyone else) donates 5mil to charity, they get a tax receipt for 5 mil. Correct me if I am wrong but this basically means they pay NO TAXES on the 5 mil. Someone who can donate 5mil is surely in the highest tax bracket, so, assuming a 50% tax rate, the 5 mil becomes a donation of approx 2.5mil.

"Where does the other 2.5mil come from then?", you might ask.

Well, basically, it comes from the taxpayers of BC, who have donated to the players charity, not by choice, but through the players total legal and legitimate tax evasion.

What I am saying then, is that if the number is 5mil and it is split between the twins, then in reality, the number becomes 1.25 mil from each sedin and 2.5 mil from the taxpayers. What is the price to get to the rafters again?

I'm not trying to take anything away from anyone's charitable donation but if we are going to give the donation that much credit, in terms of so called community service, we need to look at it from the perspective called "reality". DB, you might figure all this out if you ever become gainfully employed.
  • 0

#278 Tortorella's Rant

Tortorella's Rant

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,191 posts
  • Joined: 11-April 12

Posted 15 November 2012 - 04:24 PM

Hall of Fame has nothing to do with it. That's about a players entire hockey career. Number retirement is about service to a franchise.

Without the significance of a Stanley Cup, I see 10 seasons as a starting point. In addition to 10 seasons there has to be other significant factors. That's my opinion. Btw, saying Bure "played" 7 seasons here is a little deceiving. One was a half season due to lockout and another he only played 16 games. He was a Canuck for 7 years though.

I said this before, nobody is questioning his talent. Had they won the cup in '94, it would make up for the lack of games played here. But I don't see 428 games as above and beyond service to the franchise. Thus there needs to something of great significance to offset that. Isn't that what retiring a number is about...above and beyond service to the franchise? As I've stated, Luongo has more on his resume as a Canuck than Bure does. The two most significant factors to me are length of service and cup wins. Bure has neither. Which in my mind does lower the bar.


Hall of Fame has to do with this. His best years were obviously here serving this franchise and without those seasons, he is obviously not recognized as a hockey great. Thus being a hockey great, he is the best player this franchise has had. And whether or not a couple seasons were shortened due to factors out of his control should be irrelevant because he's here playing for this team otherwise, padding his stats and helping this team and ultimately his cause for jersey retirement one day. The only real argument against this is the undeniable lack of games.
  • 0
Posted Image

#279 lowest common denominator

lowest common denominator

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 818 posts
  • Joined: 30-August 06

Posted 15 November 2012 - 05:02 PM

The only real argument against this is the undeniable lack of games.


If that is indeed the only arguemant, which it seems to be, then I will reiterate my previous point.

Bure played 488 reg season/playoff games for Vancouver.

Bure played 766 reg season/playoff games in his entire nhl career.

You do the math.

Pavel Bure would have played way more games here were it not for sneaky, manipulative, classless mismanagement and gullible amateurish meadia. He may have even retired here.

The canucks forced Bure, a club draft pick, to use his own money to buy out his russian contract so he could come play hockey for us. That means Bure, a teenage immigrant from russia, had to fork out 50,000$ of his own money before he had the priviledge of putting on the Canuck jersey.

At this point Bure hasn't even played a game for us and he's gotten shafted financially and is sitting in LA waiting for some support from the team he came to play for.

Bure had a contract for $250,000. 50k went to russia and it probably cost him 100k to come to canada and live here for a year. How much would you have left over for charity? That's how we treated our Calder Cup winner in his first year here.

After that it got worse as Quinn tried to gypsy switch Bure with Can$ instead of American$ at a time when the Can$ was worth 2/3 American$. If someone ripped me off for that much I don't think I would want to keep working for them.


What kind of organization does that to a player? Is it any wonder why we can't attract legitimate stars here anymore?
Good grief.

Edited by scottiecanuck, 15 November 2012 - 10:20 PM.

  • 2

#280 lowest common denominator

lowest common denominator

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 818 posts
  • Joined: 30-August 06

Posted 15 November 2012 - 05:06 PM

I would like to also add that the classless Canuck organization can thank Pavel Bure, directly and personally,for the thousands of dollars I have shelled out over the years, for all things canuck black and yellow, blue and green.

How much honour does $10,000 buy?

I don't even live within 500kms of Vancouver.

I can't be the only one.
  • 1

#281 kurtis

kurtis

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,408 posts
  • Joined: 17-October 06

Posted 15 November 2012 - 06:32 PM

Canucks treated the kid like crap. I don't blame him he left...
  • 1
Posted Image

#282 Westcoasting

Westcoasting

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,329 posts
  • Joined: 29-March 10

Posted 15 November 2012 - 09:12 PM

Canucks treated the kid like crap. I don't blame him he left...


Actually they didn't, find one other player during that era that ever would agree with Bure... not going to happen. All that b.s. you are believing was the media struggle between Pat Quinn and Tony Gallagher/ Dan Russel who both couldn't stand Quinn and likewise.
  • 0

#283 lowest common denominator

lowest common denominator

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 818 posts
  • Joined: 30-August 06

Posted 16 November 2012 - 09:14 AM

What, no-one wants to touch this now that someone has made sense of it all and pointed out the facts?
  • 0

#284 Joel Heyman

Joel Heyman

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,667 posts
  • Joined: 07-June 11

Posted 16 November 2012 - 09:29 AM

Actually they didn't, find one other player during that era that ever would agree with Bure... not going to happen. All that b.s. you are believing was the media struggle between Pat Quinn and Tony Gallagher/ Dan Russel who both couldn't stand Quinn and likewise.


Gino Odjick would say that everything about the BS between the Canucks and Bure is true. And having a disagreement with Gino is a bad idea :)
  • 0

i44w87.jpgryanroyazzopardi+rolled+a+random+image+p
Blue Team


#285 lowest common denominator

lowest common denominator

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 818 posts
  • Joined: 30-August 06

Posted 16 November 2012 - 10:12 AM

I was at the season opener for the 40th season vs. the Kings. As always, I was wearing my Bure #10 skate jersey (white).

As luck would have it, my seats ended up right directly in front of the alumni box so Pat Quinn had the whole game to reflect on his time with the nux while Bure's name and number stared him back lol

Edit: The other signifigant thing to happen at that game was that I'm pretty sure sure it was Tom Larsheids last game and for some reason I missed the announcement until the guy next to me said "Anyone that doesn't stand up and applaud Tom Larsheid is not a canucks fan".

Edited by scottiecanuck, 22 November 2012 - 08:44 PM.

  • 0

#286 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,024 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 16 November 2012 - 10:19 AM

7 seasons from our best superstar and a trip to the finals fueled by him.

vs.

10+ seasons from one of our captains and just one playoff round victory in all those years.


Um, i'm taking Option A please.


If Bure was healthy for all those 7 seasons, that's 574 regular season games played as a Canuck. That's more than Brendan Morrison, Tony Tanti, Todd Bertuzzi, Kirk McLean, and Greg Adams, all of whom are known mainly as Canucks.

You'll find that greatness in general, combined with accomplishments, not games played alone, is the main determining factor when it comes to honouring players. That is why people argue that Bobby Orr, not Wayne Gretzky, is the best player of all time, even though Gretzky played almost 1,000 more games than Bobby Orr. You'll find that, just like in Naslund's and Bure's cases, both players are worth honouring in a similar fashion.



The reason Bobby Orr (despite a shortened career) is mentioned among the likes of Gretzky is....
Records
Records since surpassed
  • Held record for most assists in one NHL season from 1970 to 1981 (87 in 1969–70[154], which he surpassed in 1970–71 with 102;[155] broken by Wayne Gretzky and also bettered by Mario Lemieux)[155]
  • Held record for most goals in one NHL season by a defenceman from 1968 to 1986 (21, in 1967–68, 37 in 1970–71, broke own record in 1974–75 with 46; broken in 1985–86 by Paul Coffey with 48)[61]
  • Held record for most points by a defenceman in one game from 1973 until 1977 (7 (3 goals/4 assists) in game November 15, 1973)[61]
  • Held record for longest consecutive point-scoring streak by a defenceman from 1971 until 1984 ( 15 games, set in 1970–71 and 1973–74)[156]
  • Held record for career goal-scoring by a defenceman (270) until surpassed by Denis Potvin in 1987.[61]
  • Held record for most consecutive 100-or-more point seasons from 1974 until 1980 ( 6, from 1969–70 until 1974–75)[157]
  • Held record for career plus-minus rating from 1978 until 1985 (+597)[153]
  • Held record for most assists in a season by any player from 1971 until 1981 (102)
What has Bure done again?


Btw, I've never once heard of honoring a guy for games he could have played "if he was healthy". You honor players for what they actually did, not for what they could have done.

Edited by Baggins, 16 November 2012 - 10:28 AM.

  • 0
Posted Image

#287 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,024 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 16 November 2012 - 10:24 AM

Canucks treated the kid like crap. I don't blame him he left...


You do realize Bure sat out and demanded a trade AFTER everybody that "treated the kid like crap" was gone. Don't you find that rather odd? Particularly when his favorite guy (Keenan) was both GM and coach.
  • 0
Posted Image

#288 Tru_Knyte

Tru_Knyte

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,355 posts
  • Joined: 25-December 05

Posted 16 November 2012 - 10:35 AM

Bure brought credibility back to the team, and made Vancouver relevant in the NHL for the first time in over a decade. Without him, I doubt we would have had the run in 94. One of the most electrifying players I've ever seen, in any jersey.
  • 3
Posted Image

#289 M A K A V E L I 96

M A K A V E L I 96

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,523 posts
  • Joined: 18-April 11

Posted 16 November 2012 - 11:46 AM

Posted Image
  • 3
Posted Image

#290 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,024 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 16 November 2012 - 12:08 PM

Hall of Fame has to do with this. His best years were obviously here serving this franchise and without those seasons, he is obviously not recognized as a hockey great. Thus being a hockey great, he is the best player this franchise has had. And whether or not a couple seasons were shortened due to factors out of his control should be irrelevant because he's here playing for this team otherwise, padding his stats and helping this team and ultimately his cause for jersey retirement one day. The only real argument against this is the undeniable lack of games.


The HHoF has nothing to do with a franchise. It has to do with a players entire career, including international. It still comes down to 428 games played without anything of great significance pertaining to this franchise. I guess Boston has to retire Adam Oates number because his best years were there and he's in the HHoF now. He played 368 games for Boston. Now he played the same number of seasons for Washington and a few more games there. So does Boston get to say, "Ha! You guys have to retire his number because he played more games with you." Then of course Washington responds with, "His best years were with you so you have to do it". I just don't see majority of career or best years as a reason to retire a number when it comes to 428 games played. That really seems more like clutching for reasons than a substantial reason.

Like I said, I see 10 seasons of service as the starting point. Even with 10 seasons there needs to be several checkmarks to go with it if a Stanley Cup isn't in the equation. And a Stanley Cup victory, for a significant contributor, goes a long ways in reducing the needed games played. Otherwise my arguement for retiring Luongo's number has high merit. He has had far more league wide recognition (nominations and awards) than Bure had as a Canuck with a comparable duration here.

Maclean played here for 10 seasons, had two Vezina nominations, and still holds 12 Canuck goaltending records. He was every bit as key to the '94 run as Bure. He's in the ring of honor. That's where Bure belongs. Otherwise Kirk got shortchanged.


I just don't see a player being talented and/or exciting as enough reason to retire a number. There needs to be something more substantial about his association with the franchise to warrant it.
  • 0
Posted Image

#291 TOMapleLaughs

TOMapleLaughs

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 31,975 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 05

Posted 16 November 2012 - 12:38 PM

What has Bure done again?

And what has Naslund done again?

In this case, mere games played shouldn't get Nazzy into the club and exclude Bure. Both players have accomplished enough in their time with us to be honoured equally. Both, unlike Orr and Gretzky, haven't won cups, so what we're talking about are other criteria, and as i've explained before, Nazzy and Bure has both checked off enough criteria to both be honoured equally.
  • 0
Posted Image

#292 TOMapleLaughs

TOMapleLaughs

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 31,975 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 05

Posted 16 November 2012 - 12:45 PM

Yes, yes, '10 seasons or a cup', right?

Y'know... If we had actually won a cup without Bure, then you're 'he didn't win a cup' argument would apply for this franchise. As it were, we remain cupless.

It may sadden you to know that we are just like Buffalo, in that they are cupless as well, and they found it appropiate to hang up Pat Lafontaine's jersey, but it is the truth.

Nazzy didn't do much in the playoffs for us. Yet his jersey hangs up? Well okay... But that means Bure's can go up too.
  • 0
Posted Image

#293 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,024 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 16 November 2012 - 03:25 PM

Yes, yes, '10 seasons or a cup', right?

Y'know... If we had actually won a cup without Bure, then you're 'he didn't win a cup' argument would apply for this franchise. As it were, we remain cupless.

It may sadden you to know that we are just like Buffalo, in that they are cupless as well, and they found it appropiate to hang up Pat Lafontaine's jersey, but it is the truth.

Nazzy didn't do much in the playoffs for us. Yet his jersey hangs up? Well okay... But that means Bure's can go up too.


A cup could well have been the difference between RoH and number retirement for Snepsts.


Again, just because you're sister is stupid doesn't mean you have to be. But then Lafontaine was nominated for a Hart and Lady Bing. Plus he won a Bill Masterson. I still don't see it as enough games though. Three of his six seasons there combined total up to 51 games played. Good candidate for ring of honor imo. Had we won a cup with Sundin do we retire his number in similar fashion to Colorado with Bourque?


Naslund was here much, much longer. Very significant.
Naslund was team captain for more games than Bure was here. Quite significant.
Naslund won a Pearson. Significant
Naslund holds a boatload of team records. Significant
Naslund finished top five in the scoring race 3 consecutive seasons as a Canuck. Significant.

There's simply more significant checkmarks. You actually see one failed cup run as significant? You keep those blinders on, they're working great.


Honestly, I would have put Shanahan in the HHoF ahead of Bure.

3 Stanley Cups
3 International Gold Medals
1 International Silver Medal
King Clancy Trophy
Over 1500 NHL games played
Over 1300 NHL points


Whose career is more deserving of the HHoF? I've always maintained Bure would be in eventually, but I was actually surprised he was selected this year.
  • 2
Posted Image

#294 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,741 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 16 November 2012 - 07:41 PM

Was Bure a great player? Yes. Was Bure a great Canuck? No.

In my view, he did not care about the crest on the front of the jersey. When I say this, I do not mean to say that he cared more for the name on the back of the jersey, but rather he would have played as he did regardless of the team he was on. Being a Canuck was of no sigificance to Bure.

Was Bure mistreated by the Canucks? Maybe. This does not excuse the fact that he was not interested in being here.

Did Bure generate a lot of points? Absolutely, just look at his stats! This being said, if Bure is to get his jersey retired because of stats, why not retire Tanti's jersey? He got near to the same number of goals. He hasn't even rated the RoH. Gradin got over 70 more points than Bure over their respective careers, and I don't expect he will get his jersey retired.

I think RoH is more than sufficient for Bure and his contribution while he was here.

regards,
G.


  • 0
Following the Canucks since before Don Cherry played here.

#295 TOMapleLaughs

TOMapleLaughs

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 31,975 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 05

Posted 17 November 2012 - 12:16 AM

Snepsts? M'kay...

Dodging the point doesn't invalidate it. Since we haven't won a cup at all, Bure not winning one shouldn't count against him when comparing to Naslund. Note that before Naslund's jersey retirement, it was playoff success, such as it was, that determined who got their jersey hung up in this town. Now that Naslund's is up as well, it would seem that the requirements have changed. ie. The requirements aren't set in stone.

Knowing that the requirements are flexible, there is certainly room for both Naslund's and Bure's jerseys.

-Meanwhile, your 'much much longer' equates to just four seasons. Four more seasons for Nazzy as a Canuck. That's it? That's hardly significant.
-Naslund as 'captain' didn't lead this team to anything but one playoff round victory and probably the most humiliating 2nd round loss in team history. You're right. That's significant. Meanwhile, Bure scored the most famous and clutch goal in team history en route to our greatest, most unexpected 'heart-filled' run in team history. Gee, that sounds significant too, although... Kinda better, y'think? (Roberto was Captain. Messier was Captain. The Captain card doesn't get you far here, i'm afraid. Esp. one with almost zero playoff success.)
-Funny how Naslund's winning of a Pearson is significant, but Bure's HOF nod doesn't apply here. Hmmm... I think the second one is a bit more significant, don't you agree?
-Naslund owns Canuck records for all-time goals, all-time points, and all-time powerplay goals. That's three Canuck records.
-Bure owns Canuck records for all-time shorthanded goals, most goals by a rookie, most points by a rookie, most goals in a season, all-time playoff goals, most points in a playoff run and most goals in a playoff run. That's seven Canuck records. Bure seems to have a bigger boatload of team records, y'think?
-Bure scored 60 goals two seasons in a row and has five 50+ goal season, including ones in the dead puck era. Naslund's peak was 48, thanks to the Bertuzzi pushoff play with the man advantage.
-Bure scored more points (107,110) in a season twice than Naslund's peak (104)
-Bure's best +/- is +35 (one off from team record). Naslund's is +22.

The list goes on the more you actually look into it, bud. Yet you think i'm the one with the blinders on? Okay, Harold.


The only reason Naslund's was retired before Bure's was because it was more difficult to patch things up with Bure. Naslund was actually surprised when they retired his jersey and so were a lot of fans, but now that it's done, Bure's will likely go up soon. Esp. after the hall of fame nod, which, really, wasn't surprising at all because it's well-deserved. Just like his jersey retirement here in Vancouver.



A cup could well have been the difference between RoH and number retirement for Snepsts.


Again, just because you're sister is stupid doesn't mean you have to be. But then Lafontaine was nominated for a Hart and Lady Bing. Plus he won a Bill Masterson. I still don't see it as enough games though. Three of his six seasons there combined total up to 51 games played. Good candidate for ring of honor imo. Had we won a cup with Sundin do we retire his number in similar fashion to Colorado with Bourque?


Naslund was here much, much longer. Very significant.
Naslund was team captain for more games than Bure was here. Quite significant.
Naslund won a Pearson. Significant
Naslund holds a boatload of team records. Significant
Naslund finished top five in the scoring race 3 consecutive seasons as a Canuck. Significant.

There's simply more significant checkmarks. You actually see one failed cup run as significant? You keep those blinders on, they're working great.


Honestly, I would have put Shanahan in the HHoF ahead of Bure.

3 Stanley Cups
3 International Gold Medals
1 International Silver Medal
King Clancy Trophy
Over 1500 NHL games played
Over 1300 NHL points


Whose career is more deserving of the HHoF? I've always maintained Bure would be in eventually, but I was actually surprised he was selected this year.


  • 0
Posted Image

#296 Chip Kelly

Chip Kelly

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,355 posts
  • Joined: 17-May 10

Posted 17 November 2012 - 12:20 AM

If they don't retire his jersey now that he is already in the Hall of Fame, it will look really bad. This is a no-brainier.

Edited by Terry Crews, 17 November 2012 - 12:21 AM.

  • 0

fyo3s9.jpg

 

Credit to Mr.DirtyDangles for the find and Twilight Sparkle for making a sick siggy!


#297 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,196 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 17 November 2012 - 12:52 AM

The reason Bobby Orr (despite a shortened career) is mentioned among the likes of Gretzky is....

Records
Records since surpassed
  • Held record for most assists in one NHL season from 1970 to 1981 (87 in 1969–70[154], which he surpassed in 1970–71 with 102;[155] broken by Wayne Gretzky and also bettered by Mario Lemieux)[155]
  • Held record for most goals in one NHL season by a defenceman from 1968 to 1986 (21, in 1967–68, 37 in 1970–71, broke own record in 1974–75 with 46; broken in 1985–86 by Paul Coffey with 48)[61]
  • Held record for most points by a defenceman in one game from 1973 until 1977 (7 (3 goals/4 assists) in game November 15, 1973)[61]
  • Held record for longest consecutive point-scoring streak by a defenceman from 1971 until 1984 ( 15 games, set in 1970–71 and 1973–74)[156]
  • Held record for career goal-scoring by a defenceman (270) until surpassed by Denis Potvin in 1987.[61]
  • Held record for most consecutive 100-or-more point seasons from 1974 until 1980 ( 6, from 1969–70 until 1974–75)[157]
  • Held record for career plus-minus rating from 1978 until 1985 (+597)[153]
  • Held record for most assists in a season by any player from 1971 until 1981 (102)
What has Bure done again?


Btw, I've never once heard of honoring a guy for games he could have played "if he was healthy". You honor players for what they actually did, not for what they could have done.


Actually to me the reason Orr is considered the best of all time by some

is because of how dominant he was in all area's of the game, and how he overall could & did take over a game instantly, and how he made other stars look like minor league players.

Then all those stats just back up his dominance.


Bure was obviously no Orr but he brought the same excitment and passion, he was dedicated, loved the city, loved the fans and he was truly a legend and for sure the greatest player to ever don our uniform.
  • 0

zackass.png


#298 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,196 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 17 November 2012 - 12:58 AM

A cup could well have been the difference between RoH and number retirement for Snepsts.


Again, just because you're sister is stupid doesn't mean you have to be. But then Lafontaine was nominated for a Hart and Lady Bing. Plus he won a Bill Masterson. I still don't see it as enough games though. Three of his six seasons there combined total up to 51 games played. Good candidate for ring of honor imo. Had we won a cup with Sundin do we retire his number in similar fashion to Colorado with Bourque?


Naslund was here much, much longer. Very significant.
Naslund was team captain for more games than Bure was here. Quite significant.
Naslund won a Pearson. Significant
Naslund holds a boatload of team records. Significant
Naslund finished top five in the scoring race 3 consecutive seasons as a Canuck. Significant.

There's simply more significant checkmarks. You actually see one failed cup run as significant? You keep those blinders on, they're working great.


Honestly, I would have put Shanahan in the HHoF ahead of Bure.

3 Stanley Cups
3 International Gold Medals
1 International Silver Medal
King Clancy Trophy
Over 1500 NHL games played
Over 1300 NHL points


Whose career is more deserving of the HHoF? I've always maintained Bure would be in eventually, but I was actually surprised he was selected this year.


Osgood should be in the HHOF too right?

I know NHL stats hold alot of merrit into getting in but it is the hockey hall of fame, not the NHL hall of fame, you also look at the fact that he was a star in Russia and an international captain, plus an alternate here during his time, I think it shows he has more leadership than you give him credit for, it's just tough for him here since he doesn't speak the language particularly well.

Other than stats you also have to look at the impact the player made, in this case Bure was one of the very best players ever, a generational player who had skills that far super-seeded most. Though you say he only played 700 games, you look at what he did in those 700 games and its remarkable.

As for his # being retired here, I think as I have said to you before, he has done enough to benefit this franchise besides the skill and scoring he surely deserves the ultimate honor.
  • 0

zackass.png


#299 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,741 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 17 November 2012 - 01:05 AM

If they don't retire his jersey now that he is already in the Hall of Fame, it will look really bad. This is a no-brainier.


True enough. The HHoF makes it difficult for the Canucks to not retire his number. This being said, look at the Leafs and all of the guys who have had their numbers "Honored" rather than retired. There's some pretty impressive players on that list (eg. Armstrong, Horton, Sittler, Sundin). They are all in the HHoF. Some of them have won Cups and some of them haven't.

To my mind, all of them are of greater stature than Bure. If the Leafs aren't retiring these numbers, what with the achievements associated with the players who wore them, I believe it makes a pretty good argument in favour of the Canucks only doing the RoH for Pavel.

However, I suspect he'll get his jersey retired. I won't clap too long when it happens... just enough to be polite.

regards,
G.
  • 0
Following the Canucks since before Don Cherry played here.

#300 Tortorella's Rant

Tortorella's Rant

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,191 posts
  • Joined: 11-April 12

Posted 17 November 2012 - 02:31 AM

The HHoF has nothing to do with a franchise. It has to do with a players entire career, including international. It still comes down to 428 games played without anything of great significance pertaining to this franchise. I guess Boston has to retire Adam Oates number because his best years were there and he's in the HHoF now. He played 368 games for Boston. Now he played the same number of seasons for Washington and a few more games there. So does Boston get to say, "Ha! You guys have to retire his number because he played more games with you." Then of course Washington responds with, "His best years were with you so you have to do it". I just don't see majority of career or best years as a reason to retire a number when it comes to 428 games played. That really seems more like clutching for reasons than a substantial reason.

Like I said, I see 10 seasons of service as the starting point. Even with 10 seasons there needs to be several checkmarks to go with it if a Stanley Cup isn't in the equation. And a Stanley Cup victory, for a significant contributor, goes a long ways in reducing the needed games played. Otherwise my arguement for retiring Luongo's number has high merit. He has had far more league wide recognition (nominations and awards) than Bure had as a Canuck with a comparable duration here.

Maclean played here for 10 seasons, had two Vezina nominations, and still holds 12 Canuck goaltending records. He was every bit as key to the '94 run as Bure. He's in the ring of honor. That's where Bure belongs. Otherwise Kirk got shortchanged.


I just don't see a player being talented and/or exciting as enough reason to retire a number. There needs to be something more substantial about his association with the franchise to warrant it.


It's entirely up to management and ownership. The Bruins don't have to do jack with Oats number. I mean, they could, but they don't have to and might not. You can make the case against Bure jersey retirement, I can make the case for it. And while you disagree with how HHOF has nothing to do with it, well, you know my argument for that and there's more than a few people on this board that would agree with me I'm sure. I see you made a comparison to Nazzy. I love Naslund he deserves every bit of recognition he got so I'm not trying to discredit him but instead make a case for Bure:


Naslund was here much, much longer. Very significant.
Fair enough. But players usually don't have control over what management wants to do with the team. And I can't recall the fiasco between Bure and management for I was too young at the time. Nevertheless it plays into this decision.
Naslund was team captain for more games than Bure was here. Quite significant.
Another valid point. Then again that has to do with the team make up and the players already on the roster; Linden obviously beat Bure to the punch because he was here first and established himself.
Naslund won a Pearson. Significant
Bure won the Calder. You could make a case the Pearson is more significant because it's based on the perspective of your peers. But it terms of awards, they cancel each other out.
Naslund holds a boatload of team records. Significant
So does Bure; Most points by a Canucks rookie, single season goal record which he set and then matched the following season, tied with Trevor for the most goals in the playoffs despite less than HALF the duration. Most shorthanded goals, single game goal record as well. Dubbed the most exciting player by the fans over 5 seasons. And of course won mulitple other Canuck only awards many times. Including 4 all star game appearances.
Naslund finished top five in the scoring race 3 consecutive seasons as a Canuck. Significant.
And Bure did twice. Of course the offensive output of the game changed drastically over that decade, so it's a bit unfair to compare, but that is irrelevant.

Perhaps Kirk did get the short end of the stick. Then again perhaps Linden received too much recognition. Aside from obviously being a fan favorite, much like Bure evidently was, what does he have on Bure? Duration and captaincy. That's it. Maybe we should remove Smyl's number because again, all he has on Bure is captaincy and duration. Bure beats them both in every other department. Are these the only check marks you're talking about since neither of these guys obviously won the Cup? Maybe the criteria for retirement is too weak and the only one that should be retired is Naslund.

I personally think it should be retired. I know a lot of pinheads were against Naslund's retirement for a lack of ... whatever. More so just because they didn't like the guy and look at what happened-- jersey retirement. Of course I can see this going the other way. At this point however, I really doubt Bure gives a damn because he just received the highest honor of all.

Edited by Tortorella's Rant, 17 November 2012 - 02:32 AM.

  • 0
Posted Image




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.