ccc44 Posted November 12, 2012 Share Posted November 12, 2012 1 - HHof is an honor for a players hockey career. Number retirement is for a players contribution to that franchise. The two are not related. 2 - Colorado retiring Bourques number was rediculous and I said so at the time. Boston was a given on the other hand. Lafontaine is a mystery to me. I do wonder though if it had to do with Buffalo wanting to hire him. Which they announced 3 months later. But just because other franchises do stupid number retirements do we have to follow suit? 3 - Dionne played 12 seasons for LA. That's significant. 4 - I can't help but lmao at the Bure left his heart here. He sat out and demanded a trade AFTER everybody who had "wronged him" was gone. 5 - It's disputable what he was allowed to do? Players here have never been discouraged from giving back to the community. Are you actually suggesting management encouraged Linden to do charity work while telling Bure not to? 6 - There's no "bias" in my opinions at all. I simply don't see his number games played here as enough to warrant the teams highest honor. 7 - I have never once said the lack of a cup win is a reason not to retire a number. I said it is a factor that could make up for the lack of games played here. Just as above and beyond community service is a factor that can make up for something lacking such as a cup victory or length of service. Retiring a number is weighing all the factors not just one. The only one Bure has is high level of play. While lacking cup victories, community service, and length of service. One out of four isn't enough for me. Reasons for retiring Smyl, Linden, and Naslunds numbers: Length of service Above and beyond community service Long term captains Reason to retire Bure's number: He was exciting Do you see a difference there? To me it really lowers the bar for retiring numbers here. Yes he was skilled and exciting. But on it's own that's not enough of a reason to retire his number. RoH at most. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
infinitecarnage Posted November 12, 2012 Share Posted November 12, 2012 Do you really think that's why the players you mentioned have stuck with American teams? Maybe they're just loyal to the team that drafted and developed them. That doesn't mean they are afraid to play in Canada. Of the players you mentioned, all except one were either drafted by or traded to their current team. Which means they didn't get to pick which team they played on. When it came time to resign, they obviously liked their new home and wanted to stay loyal to their team, There's nothing wrong with that. In fact, Sakic and Doan started off on Canadian teams, but their whole team was forced to relocate, and they've ended up spending their whole career with those same teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted November 12, 2012 Share Posted November 12, 2012 Dont forget he was also far and beyond the best player to ever wear a canucks uniform not including guys like Messier and Sundin who where not even close to there prime while playing here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lowest common denominator Posted November 12, 2012 Share Posted November 12, 2012 Baggins, I don't even think you are canucks fan, to be honest. You seem to come from a place of pure ignorance when talking about Bure. Spouting lies and rumours started 20 years ago by D S Cherry. Pat Quinn literally sat in Cherry's chair the next saturday and set the record straight. I guess the damage was done, thanks Grapes! What more do you need to get over your hurt bum? Why so much hate bra? The career trajectory of Bure is this: He came into the League a superstar from his first shift and stayed that way till the end. His cometition level was unmatched. Skill, tenacity, heart, desire to win, adoration of the fans, respect from teammates, He truly had it all. Name one weakness, you can't. Anyone who watched him, including all canucks alumni, will tell you there wasn't even room for arguement about the topic. Bure was THE BEST Canuck ever. He was the FASTEST, most gifted Player in the League. And yes, he was beyond exciting on top of it all. Your swedish heroes, on the other hand, doddle away for a decade before finally potting 100 points. And thats it, they have peaked. Naslund accomplished nothing, nothing, nothing. Sedins are fun to watch in the regular season and then the playoffs come and they turn into human punching bags. PATHETIC. In the context of jersey retirement, #19 has lowered the bar to the floor but it is done. But I'm done knocking the twins and Nazzy, because I am a fan of them, despite their many flaws and severe weaknesses. #10 to the Rafters, 2 pts F.G. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted November 12, 2012 Share Posted November 12, 2012 Y'know... while Twitter searching for Bure induction ceremony info, i couldn't help but notice that the ONLY guy being a douche about it is Iain MacIntyre. Respect level for Bure: On the rise. Respect level for IMac: Hits new low. Self-servant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted November 12, 2012 Share Posted November 12, 2012 You didn't seem to grasp most of the points, so i'll just wrap it up by saying that it doesn't really matter if you agree with everyone or not. Cheers. 1 - HHof is an honor for a players hockey career. Number retirement is for a players contribution to that franchise. The two are not related. 2 - Colorado retiring Bourques number was rediculous and I said so at the time. Boston was a given on the other hand. Lafontaine is a mystery to me. I do wonder though if it had to do with Buffalo wanting to hire him. Which they announced 3 months later. But just because other franchises do stupid number retirements do we have to follow suit? 3 - Dionne played 12 seasons for LA. That's significant. 4 - I can't help but lmao at the Bure left his heart here. He sat out and demanded a trade AFTER everybody who had "wronged him" was gone. 5 - It's disputable what he was allowed to do? Players here have never been discouraged from giving back to the community. Are you actually suggesting management encouraged Linden to do charity work while telling Bure not to? 6 - There's no "bias" in my opinions at all. I simply don't see his number games played here as enough to warrant the teams highest honor. 7 - I have never once said the lack of a cup win is a reason not to retire a number. I said it is a factor that could make up for the lack of games played here. Just as above and beyond community service is a factor that can make up for something lacking such as a cup victory or length of service. Retiring a number is weighing all the factors not just one. The only one Bure has is high level of play. While lacking cup victories, community service, and length of service. One out of four isn't enough for me. Reasons for retiring Smyl, Linden, and Naslunds numbers: Length of service Above and beyond community service Long term captains Reason to retire Bure's number: He was exciting Do you see a difference there? To me it really lowers the bar for retiring numbers here. Yes he was skilled and exciting. But on it's own that's not enough of a reason to retire his number. RoH at most. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Great Save Luongo!!! Posted November 12, 2012 Share Posted November 12, 2012 I love how the Canucks twitter is just taunting the hell out of us with the "Bure rumour" tweets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pouria Posted November 12, 2012 Share Posted November 12, 2012 Doesn't deserve it. Bure was one of my favourite players as a kid. I remember watching all the Canucks games with wide eyes hoping they'd just throw him the puck every time he was on the ice, then I'd watch Sports Page later that night just to catch the highlights of what I'd already seen. But being "electrifying" isn't good enough. He should be honoured somehow, in some way, but retiring a shirt number is too much. He didn't win us a cup, he had no leadership qualities, he wasn't a noted community figure, and then he split (for reasons that vary depending on who's speaking about it). The whole thing seems... just wrong to me. The whole shirt-retiring ceremony is getting out of hand. It should be reserved for the absolute best-of-the-best, in my opinion, not for when a franchise wants to create buzz and fanfare where there otherwise is none. When Henrik and Daniel retire, their shirts will probably be retired too, according to a 1040 panel and all the callers I'd heard last summer. That, according to all the fans and commentators, will be a no brainer. And like someone else said... 6 shirts in about a decade... and no stanley cup. It's almost embarrassing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ccc44 Posted November 12, 2012 Share Posted November 12, 2012 Isn't that why he was exciting? It is not enough of a reason to retire his number. One could argue that Bure is the most talented to play here. He never won any major awards while playing here other than rookie of the year, which of course has a limited field. During his time in Vancouver he only made it in the top ten in points twice. Fifth in 93/94 and third in 97/98. Naslund did it 3 times finishing second in scoring in both 01/02 and 02/03 and finished fourth in 03/04. He also won the Lester B. Pearson. The Sedins each have won the scoring title and the Art Ross that goes with it. Plus Daniel won the Ted Lindsay award, while Henrik won the Hart. Henrik has been in the top 10 for the past three seasons (equalling Naslunds three in a row Canuck record) and Daniel just the one time he won the scoring title. And they still have several playing years ahead of them yet. It's tough to compare talent level from different eras. But Bure came into the league when it was at it's offensive peak in the 90's. While Naslund peaked during the dead puck era and the Sedins had just come into the league. The biggest difference between the four is Bure came into the league a star while the other three developed into stars. But the best comparison of talent level is how they compared to their peers during their respective eras. Bure was a talented star player without a doubt. But is that enough reason to retire his number here? Wouldn't we have to retire Loungo's number based on Bure's going up? He's an all- star goalie, played six seasons here, has a Jennings award plus two Vezina nominations. If Kesler was traded tomorrow wouldn't we still have to retire his number as well? He's played 7 seasons here (with more games played than Bure), with three Selke nominations that includes one Selke win. Both have more star accolades to there credit as Canucks than Bure. Where do you draw the line? Our rafters will soon look like the Canadiens, except they have a 95 year history along with a boat load of Stanley Cups. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RWMc1 Posted November 12, 2012 Share Posted November 12, 2012 I hope that Bure's number is not retired. He was the antithesis of a team player. He left after sitting out his last season and demanding to be traded. Add the fact that he has never returned to Vancouver in any capacity since his hockey career ended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted November 13, 2012 Share Posted November 13, 2012 Baggins, I don't even think you are canucks fan, to be honest. You seem to come from a place of pure ignorance when talking about Bure. Spouting lies and rumours started 20 years ago Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted November 13, 2012 Share Posted November 13, 2012 Douche Baggins, On a night when an outstanding player has finally given true Canucks fans something that they can truly be proud of, you have proven yourself an embarrassment to Canucks Nation. You conveniently stopped reading my post so you can continue on with your head planted firmly up your ass, so I will repost it for you in case you decide to come out for some fresh air and a dosage of reality: And your sig should read "They said sumthin bad about my NAZZY WAAAAAAAAAAAAA! You are an embarassment to Canuck players and Canuck fans everywhere. Pissoff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M A K A V E L I 96 Posted November 13, 2012 Share Posted November 13, 2012 Your "fastest most gifted player in the league" never won a scoring title nor even the speed competition at any of his six all star appearances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ccc44 Posted November 13, 2012 Share Posted November 13, 2012 I stopped reading there. Quote anything I said that is a lie. How about arguing my points. The largest of which being Bure didn't play enough games here to warrant retiring his number. My previous post was full of facts. Bure hit top ten in the league scoring race twice in his time here. Both Naslund and Henrik did that three consecutive seasons. I've never once said Bure lacks talent or wasn't exciting . I simply question whether that's enough reason to retire his number. Ignorance is ignoring facts. Which appears to be your department. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted November 13, 2012 Share Posted November 13, 2012 Naslund and H Sedin never scored 60 goals in a season or even 50 . Didn't you say something about ignoring facts ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted November 13, 2012 Share Posted November 13, 2012 Bure owns the Canuck franchise records for: -most goals in a season -most goals in a playoff run -most points in a playoff run -most points as a rookie (shared). -most short-handed goals as a Canuck -most goals and points scored per game as a Canuck (ahead of Tanti and Gradin, respectively) He is also -2nd in all-time Canuck playoff goals behind Trevor. -3rd in all-time Canuck playoff points behind Henrik and Trevor. -7th in all-time Canuck career points, despite playing 200-600 less games than guys above him. -5th in all-time Canuck career goals, despite playing 400-600 less games than guys above him. He didn't just play at a 'high level' for us. He played at a 'superstar level' for us. So if we're 'lowering the bar' for a Bure jersey retirement here, Baggins, it is really all that low? The clubs' only superstar isn't good enough to hang beside Smyl, who owned those career Canuck franchise records only because he hung around long enough? With all due respect to The Steamer, his jersey hanging up just marks how pathetic we were during his time here. Bure changed all that. (Heh. Watch Florida retire his jersey too.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuck7635 Posted November 13, 2012 Share Posted November 13, 2012 Bure owns the Canuck franchise records for: -most goals in a season -most goals in a playoff run -most points in a playoff run -most points as a rookie (shared). -most short-handed goals as a Canuck -most goals and points scored per game as a Canuck (ahead of Tanti and Gradin, respectively) He is also -2nd in all-time Canuck playoff goals behind Trevor. -3rd in all-time Canuck playoff points behind Henrik and Trevor. -7th in all-time Canuck career points, despite playing 200-600 less games than guys above him. -5th in all-time Canuck career goals, despite playing 400-600 less games than guys above him. He didn't just play at a 'high level' for us. He played at a 'superstar level' for us. So if we're 'lowering the bar' for a Bure jersey retirement here, Baggins, it is really all that low? The clubs' only superstar isn't good enough to hang beside Smyl, who owned those career Canuck franchise records only because he hung around long enough? With all due respect to The Steamer, his jersey hanging up just marks how pathetic we were during his time here. Bure changed all that. (Heh. Watch Florida retire his jersey too.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted November 13, 2012 Share Posted November 13, 2012 Of course. Considering that without his accomplishments as a Canuck he wouldn't have gotten into the hall of fame, that may also be a factor to consider. Naslund, Linden and Smyl, meanwhile, won't be getting into the hall. So is Bure in fact 'raising the bar' here? I know that Bure's time here was a bit brief, and that's too bad, but he did so much for this franchise in that span of time. ie. He made the Canucks coming into town a 'must see' for a few years. Let's say Crosby never plays for the Pens again because of his head problems. Jersey still retired in Pittsburgh? Okay, he's got a cup. So let's say Ovechkin stays in Russia. Caps still retire Gr8's jersey? You'd be amazed how much the superstar factor comes into play when determining honours. You must respect the skillz, brah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winacup Posted November 13, 2012 Share Posted November 13, 2012 the most telling stats are his playoff records. captain choke and the butterflies have had much more time and opportunity to step up and claim those records but have consistently failed to produce when it counts most. if they had even a fraction of bure's heart and desire the cup drought would be over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted November 13, 2012 Share Posted November 13, 2012 Y'know, it is possible to post in the Bure thread without disrespecting Naslund and the Sedins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.