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

#451 lowest common denominator

lowest common denominator

    Comets Star

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

Posted 08 December 2012 - 12:08 PM

^^^^^
This









is really really stupid.


You don't need to **** talk one guy to glorify another. Naslund was/is worthy of having his jersey retired. If not for all the bull**** surrounding Bure there would be no question about his being retired as well.


Care to elaborate on why this is stupid? Or are you just going to throw stones from a distance?

It's pretty obvious that Naslund's jersey in the rafters is a complete joke/publicity stunt performed by a corporation to maximize profits.

The comparisons need to be made because #19 hangs and #10 does not. It hurts, I know.
  • 0

#452 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,123 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 08 December 2012 - 12:35 PM

Care to elaborate on why this is stupid? Or are you just going to throw stones from a distance?

It's pretty obvious that Naslund's jersey in the rafters is a complete joke/publicity stunt performed by a corporation to maximize profits.

The comparisons need to be made because #19 hangs and #10 does not. It hurts, I know.


Care to elaborate on why this is stupid? Or are you just going to throw stones from a distance?

It's pretty obvious that Naslund's jersey in the rafters is a complete joke/publicity stunt performed by a corporation to maximize profits.

The comparisons need to be made because #19 hangs and #10 does not. It hurts, I know.


How did it maximize profits??? You immediately ran out and bought a Naslund jersey, Canucks cap and jacket, and seasons tickets because a number was retired???? Did the sellouts begin after Naslunds number was retired???

Posted Image
  • 0
Posted Image

#453 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,123 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 08 December 2012 - 12:42 PM

Naslund was second best a few times is nice but actually horse crap when speaking in terms of jersey retirement. 800+ games is nothing special. 1200 games? Now you have some basis for glorification if that is your only laurel to rest upon.

Again, you have to look at the reasons why Bure played 500- games here, then you will see what a travesty it was for canucks fans.


How about actually answering a question....

If the reason he left was because he was screwed here then please explain why he sat out and demanded a trade after EVERYBODY that screwed him was gone. I don't buy the reason.


The timing makes no sense at all. So come on Scottie explain away.
  • 0
Posted Image

#454 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,123 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 08 December 2012 - 01:28 PM

Still, you're making a pro-skill argument for Naslund and then go on to say that Bure's superior skill doesn't matter. Straw man argument.

Anyway, two major factors in Naslund's offense is 1: The powerplay and 2: Todd Bertuzzi. Without whom, Naslund has no room. Their best season together was powerplay-driven. Hello, Bert push-off play?

Bure did it all himself. That seperates star and superstar status. Bure was our only one. That's why he's in the hall and Naslund will not be, despite a shorter career.

Won't repeat all the other stuff that makes Bure as worthy as Naslund for jersey retirement.


For the billionth time.... nobody here has disputed Bure's talent. It all comes down to the games played. Which is not enough for the teams highest honor imo. And all around the league Naslund was referred to as a superstar. Which he was in his time. It's sad that the only way you can even attempt to make a case for Bure is to degrade a great Canuck. That's another big difference between the two, great player versus great Canuck.

The only argument in Bure's favor is he was talented. Luongo is talented, and also referred to as a superstar. I honestly don't see how we don't retire Luongo's number if Bure's goes up. Two Vezina nominations, a Hart nomination, talent, similar time frame here, and a failed cup run. Hell Lou has more reasons for a number retirement because of those nominations. Which is why talent alone shouldn't be the determining factor.

Btw, Naslund had 114 pp goals while Bure had 69. Naslund played around double the games. Do the math and tell me Bure didn't benifit from the pp as well. Talented players tend to score pp goals.That's not news to me.
  • 0
Posted Image

#455 lowest common denominator

lowest common denominator

    Comets Star

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

Posted 08 December 2012 - 01:47 PM

How did it maximize profits??? You immediately ran out and bought a Naslund jersey, Canucks cap and jacket, and seasons tickets because a number was retired???? Did the sellouts begin after Naslunds number was retired???


It was an attempt to create a "rich history" that does not exist, especially doesn't exist with Naslund. It was an attempt to pull on the heart strings of fans, retaining and growing the fan base, thus increasing profits. You obviously fell for it.

800+ gp is squat if thaat is all you got.
Get to 1200 and then you have something if your only merrit is the amount of games played. Naslund would actually need 1440 gp cuz he only averaged about 80% effort most of the time.

As for your other monotonous line of questioning:


If the reason he left was because he was screwed here then please explain why he sat out and demanded a trade after EVERYBODY that screwed him was gone. I don't buy the reason. Also, the teammates he had come to know and trust as friends and confidants were all gone and we were left with a hodgepodge pile of crap lead by Messier the Puke and Keenan. +The Van media had mostly turned on him, in their wholly unproffesional approach, so he was left to fend for himself. Who knows, Bure had had enough crap after giving his all to the team and city and wanted out? You would really have to ask him, but judging from what I can see, he was well within his rights.

You don't retire a number for what could have been, you do it for what actually was.
What it actually was was a hhof career, elite play for his entire time in the NHL, helped to save the franchise, brought a whole new generation of canuck fans and hockey fans in general. Too bad he only played 500- games, kinda like Orr#4.


Making the Naslund/Bure comparison shouldn't Tanti's number have been retired due to Smyl's? He was more skilled, scored more goals blah, blah. Quality over quantity. The truth is Naslund stacks up quite well to the other two numbers up there.12 & 16 are up there for the way they played and the fact they gave it their all, bringing us as close as we could possibly be to greatness and both left everything on the ice. Character, toughness, desire to win and compete, heart, soul, these are qualities of a Canuck Leader. Naslund had none of these qualities. He did have some better than average numbers for a few seasons, that is all.
  • 3

#456 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,123 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 08 December 2012 - 05:52 PM

It was an attempt to create a "rich history" that does not exist, especially doesn't exist with Naslund. It was an attempt to pull on the heart strings of fans, retaining and growing the fan base, thus increasing profits. You obviously fell for it.

800+ gp is squat if thaat is all you got.
Get to 1200 and then you have something if your only merrit is the amount of games played. Naslund would actually need 1440 gp cuz he only averaged about 80% effort most of the time.

As for your other monotonous line of questioning:


If the reason he left was because he was screwed here then please explain why he sat out and demanded a trade after EVERYBODY that screwed him was gone. I don't buy the reason. Also, the teammates he had come to know and trust as friends and confidants were all gone and we were left with a hodgepodge pile of crap lead by Messier the Puke and Keenan. +The Van media had mostly turned on him, in their wholly unproffesional approach, so he was left to fend for himself. Who knows, Bure had had enough crap after giving his all to the team and city and wanted out? You would really have to ask him, but judging from what I can see, he was well within his rights.

You don't retire a number for what could have been, you do it for what actually was.
What it actually was was a hhof career, elite play for his entire time in the NHL, helped to save the franchise, brought a whole new generation of canuck fans and hockey fans in general. Too bad he only played 500- games, kinda like Orr#4.


Making the Naslund/Bure comparison shouldn't Tanti's number have been retired due to Smyl's? He was more skilled, scored more goals blah, blah. Quality over quantity. The truth is Naslund stacks up quite well to the other two numbers up there.12 & 16 are up there for the way they played and the fact they gave it their all, bringing us as close as we could possibly be to greatness and both left everything on the ice. Character, toughness, desire to win and compete, heart, soul, these are qualities of a Canuck Leader. Naslund had none of these qualities. He did have some better than average numbers for a few seasons, that is all.


That's just more blah blah blah. I get that some don't appreciate the skilled non-physical players as much. But it's not why you get you number retired. Nor do you get your number retired for making it past the second round once in your career and not win the cup. You get your number retired for a number of reasons that add up to a significant reason to retire the players number. Smyl , Linden and Nasland have several of those significant reasons in common. That's why all three have been honored. Snepts was a heart and soul player, an all-star, and a cup finalist. Why isn't his number retired? It's as if you clutching at straws to find reasons to justify Bure having his number retired. I'm not buying what you're selling.

Btw, Keenan was Bure's favorite hockey boss. Said so himself. Another reason the timing of his sitting out doesn't make sense. And I've already debunked the "Bure saved the team" crap. The fans came back because of Linden and Maclean the seasaon prior to Bure playing. Ther attendance numbers show that.

Anyway, I'm off to Vegas for a week. You have fun with your Bure fantasies.
  • 0
Posted Image

#457 lowest common denominator

lowest common denominator

    Comets Star

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

Posted 08 December 2012 - 07:42 PM

Good luck. Put a hundred bux on #10 for me would you?

Edit: Who goes to LV for a week? Money buys alot of things but taste and class ain't 2 of 'em.

Edited by scottiecanuck, 13 December 2012 - 09:25 AM.

  • 0

#458 Pears

Pears

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,386 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 11

Posted 08 December 2012 - 07:51 PM

Good luck. Put a hundred bux on #10 for me would you?

Your hate for Bure is quite pathetic really. Even though I wasn't born yet/old enough to remember seeing Bure play, his highlights alone are enough to let me know that he was one of the most electric players of his day. He does deserve to have his jersey retired. Not sure why you're so butthurt about it.
  • 0

In my eyes drouin is overrated he can score in the qmjhl but did nothing in last two gold medal games that canada lost. Fox will be better pro than him talk to me in five yrs

Gaudreau has one NHL goal whereas all your "prized" prospects have none.

   ryan kesler is going to the chicago blackhawks ...       quote me on it


#459 TOMapleLaughs

TOMapleLaughs

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,311 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 05

Posted 08 December 2012 - 07:59 PM

Meh. It's like you forget every point made after a short while. What's the point in repeating.

Have fun in Vegas. Odds of a Bure retired Jersey? Don't bet against it.

For the billionth time.... nobody here has disputed Bure's talent. It all comes down to the games played. Which is not enough for the teams highest honor imo. And all around the league Naslund was referred to as a superstar. Which he was in his time. It's sad that the only way you can even attempt to make a case for Bure is to degrade a great Canuck. That's another big difference between the two, great player versus great Canuck.

The only argument in Bure's favor is he was talented. Luongo is talented, and also referred to as a superstar. I honestly don't see how we don't retire Luongo's number if Bure's goes up. Two Vezina nominations, a Hart nomination, talent, similar time frame here, and a failed cup run. Hell Lou has more reasons for a number retirement because of those nominations. Which is why talent alone shouldn't be the determining factor.

Btw, Naslund had 114 pp goals while Bure had 69. Naslund played around double the games. Do the math and tell me Bure didn't benifit from the pp as well. Talented players tend to score pp goals.That's not news to me.


  • 2
Posted Image

#460 ultmatenuckfan17

ultmatenuckfan17

    K-Wing Regular

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 44 posts
  • Joined: 06-December 12

Posted 08 December 2012 - 08:03 PM

who is bure plz respond
  • 0
GO CANUCKS

#461 Bite me Burr

Bite me Burr

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,246 posts
  • Joined: 04-February 08

Posted 08 December 2012 - 09:28 PM

lol...irony

ahaha, ya
  • 0
CHARACTER AND TOUGHNESS

#462 Bite me Burr

Bite me Burr

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,246 posts
  • Joined: 04-February 08

Posted 08 December 2012 - 09:43 PM

As for the Baggins reference to the dead puck era and the low scoring, I can't really think of anything cooler to watch break the trap and such, as a time warping Bure, on a dash.

Who can really say how many goals he would have playing in Naslund's NHL. It was brutal when Bure played. Naslund enjoyed a tightly called NHL. Now, even if your stick looks at a guy you get a hooking penalty... and the interferance calls??? Oh my! Bure would be killing this new, all-star like, NHL.

Bure - A #99 said he wouldn't have retired if he could have played with Bure = Mega-endoresment
Naslund - B ( and later on, C+ )

HHOF vs faded off into oblivion. We should all celebrate the thrill Bure brought this team.
  • 3
CHARACTER AND TOUGHNESS

#463 EmployeeoftheMonth

EmployeeoftheMonth

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,505 posts
  • Joined: 04-September 06

Posted 08 December 2012 - 11:54 PM

Care to elaborate on why this is stupid? Or are you just going to throw stones from a distance?

It's pretty obvious that Naslund's jersey in the rafters is a complete joke/publicity stunt performed by a corporation to maximize profits.

The comparisons need to be made because #19 hangs and #10 does not. It hurts, I know.


I'm not throwing stones I'm saying that your opinion is stupid. You're still more than welcome to it.

No need to elaborate on that I don't think. Seems pretty simple and straight forward.
  • 0
Posted Image
Posted Image

#464 CookieCrumbs

CookieCrumbs

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,026 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 11

Posted 09 December 2012 - 12:29 AM

Your hate for Bure is quite pathetic really. Even though I wasn't born yet/old enough to remember seeing Bure play, his highlights alone are enough to let me know that he was one of the most electric players of his day. He does deserve to have his jersey retired. Not sure why you're so butthurt about it.


His hate for Bure? Have I missed something?

Let me go back and reread this, because I must have misread this debate at some point.
  • 0

#465 TOMapleLaughs

TOMapleLaughs

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,311 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 05

Posted 09 December 2012 - 10:21 AM

^^ Baggins' dead puck era argument is also flawed because Bure scored 58 and 59 goals for the Panthers in the middle of the dead puck era. He also scored 51 goals for us at the start of the dead puck era.

So how many goals would Naslund have scored in Bure's early years? Um, around the same. Probably less if there was no Bertuzzi by his side.

The only reason Bure slowed down at all was because of his knees, not the era.
  • 3
Posted Image

#466 M A K A V E L I 96

M A K A V E L I 96

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,534 posts
  • Joined: 18-April 11

Posted 09 December 2012 - 02:22 PM

For the billionth time.... nobody here has disputed Bure's talent. It all comes down to the games played. Which is not enough for the teams highest honor imo.


Really, it comes down to games played? Impact during games played meas nothing? Naslund wasn't a star in the beginning or end of his career here. Why should the games played during that time matter? He had 4 really good seasons as a Canuck. Bure was the best player on the team throughout his entire career as a Canuck.
  • 4
Posted Image

#467 Drybone

Drybone

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,403 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 12

Posted 09 December 2012 - 03:46 PM

How did it maximize profits??? You immediately ran out and bought a Naslund jersey, Canucks cap and jacket, and seasons tickets because a number was retired???? Did the sellouts begin after Naslunds number was retired???

Posted Image


I dunno dude. Naslund was here before and after Bertuzzi was and he was NOT some earth shattering guy. Nor was he in Pittsburg or the Rangers .

Naslund was superstar good playing with Bertuzzi until he was leveled by Steve Moore.
  • 0
Posted Image

#468 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,256 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 09 December 2012 - 11:43 PM

How about actually answering a question....



The timing makes no sense at all. So come on Scottie explain away.


He had actually thought about leaving prior, but managment (Quinn) had convinced him to stay, then when Quinn is on and things went south there was really no hope for him here, and he moved on.

No reason to hold hard feelings, he did alot for us in his time here. We should be thankful for that and honor him accordingly (With #10 going up)

That's just more blah blah blah. I get that some don't appreciate the skilled non-physical players as much. But it's not why you get you number retired. Nor do you get your number retired for making it past the second round once in your career and not win the cup. You get your number retired for a number of reasons that add up to a significant reason to retire the players number. Smyl , Linden and Nasland have several of those significant reasons in common. That's why all three have been honored. Snepts was a heart and soul player, an all-star, and a cup finalist. Why isn't his number retired? It's as if you clutching at straws to find reasons to justify Bure having his number retired. I'm not buying what you're selling.


I get the sense that you don't think we should have any #'s retired.

Smyl's is up because really up until him our organization had little to no hope. He carried our team has been apart of our organization and a leader in our organization since his draft day. No question deserving IMO.

Linden, I don't even have to explain do I? Deserving.

Naslund earned it IMO, carried the team with such class and humility. And he did carry the team. Transformed our team into a near era, created new fans and really built up the success of our market. Was a captain and was one of our greatest ever. Great in the community. And whatever else. Deserving

Bure is easily the greatest talent we have ever had, the only true HHOF we have had that we can call our own IMO. He captivated Vancouver, made fans care about the team again, introduced new generations of fans that are still being felt today. Unlike all the others he was the only player that was able to maintain his absolute top level of play throughout all his years in Vancouver, and was probably a top 5 player in the NHL in those years. His impact on the team's success both at the time and for the future to me aswell as him being the greatest player we have ever had, and a HHOF make it an easy choice for me to reitre him.


And BTW Baggins, this is the point I would like to hear your response too.

You don't retire a number for what could have been, you do it for what actually was.
What it actually was was a hhof career, elite play for his entire time in the NHL, helped to save the franchise, brought a whole new generation of canuck fans and hockey fans in general. Too bad he only played 500- games, kinda like Orr#4.


  • 1

zackass.png


#469 lowest common denominator

lowest common denominator

    Comets Star

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

Posted 11 December 2012 - 09:03 AM

Who said Naslund was "more" than Bure?



Uhm, that would be you, by saying Naslund should be in the rafters and Bure should not.


Some people here have been bringing up Tony Tanti in comparison to Bure. While Tanti's stats are similar to Bure's in that they are weighted 60/40ish goals to assists,and he was an exciting player, his career is much more comparable to Naslund's overall. Especially in terms of the Canucks.

Tanti wasn't drafted here and did not retire here.
Tanti did not enjoy any kind of playoff success, and not much regseason success.
Tanti's stats are better than Naslunds but don't even come close to Bure's.

Tanti's was actually the first hockey card I can remember collecting and coveting but I was pretty much too young to watch him with any kind of hockey sense. Also, back in those days, we only got a handful of games on TV every year and they were events because of it. So the players maybe played under less scrutiny, they sure weren't judged and over analyzed frame by frame like they are today.

I would say Tanti deserves to be in the ROH, probably ahead of Naslund.
  • 0

#470 lowest common denominator

lowest common denominator

    Comets Star

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

Posted 11 December 2012 - 09:06 AM

who is bure plz respond


Bure is how french people say butter.
  • 0

#471 nuck nit

nuck nit

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,888 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 10

Posted 13 December 2012 - 12:23 AM

Bure is how knowledgeable hockey fans say HHOF worthy.

Not having Pavel honored in this city is a testament to what it is and where it is at.

Those dissing him should spend the rest of their lives in a desert purgatory.
  • 1

#472 lowest common denominator

lowest common denominator

    Comets Star

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

Posted 13 December 2012 - 09:02 PM

That's just more blah blah blah.


Exactly! The blah blah blah!

They used to call the "blah blahblah" "Intangibles". As in: Qualities you can't really put into words or describe with statistics.

Edited by scottiecanuck, 13 December 2012 - 10:20 PM.

  • 2

#473 lowest common denominator

lowest common denominator

    Comets Star

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

Posted 13 December 2012 - 09:08 PM

Bure is how knowledgeable hockey fans say HHOF worthy.

Not having Pavel honored in this city is a testament to what it is and where it is at.

Those dissing him should spend the rest of their lives in a desert purgatory.


When you diss Bure, fool, you diss yourself
  • 0

#474 Pears

Pears

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,386 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 11

Posted 13 December 2012 - 09:16 PM

who is bure plz respond

You didn't just ask this question, did you? How can you call yourself the 'ultimate nuckfan' if you've never heard of arguably the greatest player in Canucks history?
  • 0

In my eyes drouin is overrated he can score in the qmjhl but did nothing in last two gold medal games that canada lost. Fox will be better pro than him talk to me in five yrs

Gaudreau has one NHL goal whereas all your "prized" prospects have none.

   ryan kesler is going to the chicago blackhawks ...       quote me on it


#475 nuck nit

nuck nit

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,888 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 10

Posted 13 December 2012 - 11:28 PM

“Right from the day he first stepped on the ice for the Vancouver Canucks, he wowed the city.” –Pat Quinn

“What Pavel brought at the time, the team never had before. And that was a superstar that was young and I wouldn’t say the word overly confident but he wasn’t afraid to say ‘Look I’m going to score 50 goals’, and he went out and did it.” –Cliff Ronning

“Some of the things that Pavel did at high speed, I couldn’t do it walking through it sometimes. Players are always fooling around before practice or during practice to try different things. But when Pavel did this, it was all at a high speed and he did it in games.” –Stan Smyl

“He was scary with the puck, I mean he could do stuff that made other players look like they were in another league.” –Arthur Griffiths

“Pavel was the type of player, and there’s not a lot of guys that can do that, but literally bring people out of their seats and incredibly explosive. He just made things happen when you didn’t think anything could happen.” –Trevor Linden

“He’s the most talented hockey player I’ve ever played with in my life and that I’ve ever seen. Period.” –Greg Adams
  • 2

#476 nuck nit

nuck nit

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,888 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 10

Posted 14 December 2012 - 03:07 AM

I agree that Bure should not stoop so low as to have his number retired in Vancouver.

Statue of Pavel outside Roger's corporate arena or nada.
  • 0

#477 lowest common denominator

lowest common denominator

    Comets Star

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

Posted 14 December 2012 - 09:44 AM

That might be the way to go if Pavel doesn't want the honour.
  • 0

#478 CookieCrumbs

CookieCrumbs

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,026 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 11

Posted 14 December 2012 - 10:31 PM

You didn't just ask this question, did you? How can you call yourself the 'ultimate nuckfan' if you've never heard of arguably the greatest player in Canucks history?


You didn't actually give that guy a serious response did you?
  • 0

#479 cripplereh

cripplereh

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,563 posts
  • Joined: 28-July 08

Posted 15 December 2012 - 07:00 PM

They should retire Bure's number as he was the best RW this team has had and in my opinion 100 times better then Naslund ever was.
  • 0
Posted Image

#480 lowest common denominator

lowest common denominator

    Comets Star

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

Posted 18 December 2012 - 10:57 AM

Bure's NHL HHOF career spanned from 1991 to 2003

Naslund's NHL career spanned from 1993 to 2009

The so called "Dead Puck" era (a terrible descriptor and catch phrase, if you ask me) is more non-sense from someone who is drunk on Haterade. Look at the games from the 90's. Clutching, grabbing, mugging, hooking, it's crazy to watch what went on back then in contrast to todays regular season games. It was damned good hockey and Bure was awesome.

Thanks Pavel, if you happen to reading this, I hope you know that the loud and vocal few who have fell hook line and sinker for your bad guy whitewashing at the hands of the former managment and media are a minority, however vocal they may be. Your true fans are still here, waiting for the time when we can cheer you once again.
  • 1




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.