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

#151 grandmaster

grandmaster

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,705 posts
  • Joined: 15-April 04

Posted 09 November 2012 - 12:11 PM

Did they kick both Neely and Messier out?????


Difference is:
Teams that had these players for longer than 5 minutes retired their jerseys. We had Bure for almost a decade

Edited by grandmaster, 09 November 2012 - 12:12 PM.

  • 0

Favorite all time Canuck: Bertuzzi 2002-2003 season
Most clutch all time Canuck: Linden 1994 Stanley Cup Playoffs
Most exciting all time Canuck: Pavel Bure 90's

#152 BobLoblaw

BobLoblaw

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 836 posts
  • Joined: 28-April 07

Posted 09 November 2012 - 01:17 PM

Did they kick both Neely and Messier out?????

Did you miss Sundin and Larionov?????


I think the point he was trying to make was that Bure is the only Hall of Famer who is recognized league-wide as a Canuck first. Ask any NHL fan what team they think of when they hear Bure's name and it's the Vancouver Canucks.

The Canucks were merely a footnote in the careers of Neely, Messier and Sundin.
  • 0

#153 BuretoMogilny

BuretoMogilny

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,602 posts
  • Joined: 26-August 12

Posted 09 November 2012 - 01:29 PM

Yes, injuries was the reason we lost, but how do you get injured? By being continuously pounded, whacked and slashed after the whistle consistently by all of their lines. Boston injured us by physically wearing us down with their big defencemen and we had no one to dish it back to them.

In any playoff series, the winner is often the team that survives. This is mostly how we beat Chicago that year - the Blackhawk stars were targetted repeatedly and despite them coming back, at the end of the day we wore them out more than they did to us.

Now look at Los Angeles. They breezed to the Cup because of their size across all lines, which meant they consistently hit their opponents and physically broke them down. The biggest difference between these Cup winners and the Canucks in 2011 was eventually our inability to do so. We had the Sedins responsible for scoring, Kesler responsible for scoring and hitting, a great 3rd line that was throwing around their weight and scoring timely goals but an INVISIBLE 4th line and worst of all - absolutely no size on our blueline. We cannot have one physically imposing (Edler) defenceman and expect to win a Cup and NO Bieksa and Hamhuis are not hard hitters when you compare them to the likes of Chara, McQuaid, Ference, Boychuk, Mitchell and Matt Greene who are physical beasts.



I'm sorry but I've never seen Patrick Kane, Hossa or Justin Williams throw a hit in my life. Even Kopitar and Toews are rarely throwing hits. Every team has their skilled guys who focus purely on scoring, the reason Cup winners succeed is because these skilled guys are complemented by physical monsters when on the ice.

Consider Kane. When his line is on the ice, so are Seabrook and Keith so no one messes with him.
Consider Kopitar. When he's on the ice, so are Mitchell and Brown.
Consider Krejci. When he's on the ice, so are Chara and Lucic.

Now look at the Sedins. When they're out there, they have Alex Burrows, Bieksa and Hamhuis. Hamhuis doesn't have a mean bone in him, especially on the ice and Bieksa and Burrows are quite frankly too small to scare or hurt anyone when compared to the guys above.

The Canucks need size and muscle, especially on the blueline. Yes Kassian will help, but he's not on the ice most of the time. Our biggest, #1 problem since 2011 has been lack of big, physical defenders and it will continue to be the reason we fall in the playoffs to teams with towers on the blueline. The key to success is skill up front to score and physical checkers on the blueline to wear down opposing forwards in the playoffs. We DON'T need more bulky, unskilled forwards, our forward core has a perfect mix right now, let's just focuss on turning this puck-moving, pinching and fragile defence into a rock-sturdy, no-mistake defence.



Not disputing we lacked size, have said that we need that before, and that the Kassian deal was smart for that reason. As you may have seen in my post I mentioned having a "Kassian in his prime" for that reason.

The injuries that happened are bad luck not an issue of size. Hamhuis made a terrific hip check on Lucic, but was unstable and hurt his hip. You can argue well its bec Lucic was so much bigger, maybe the cause maybe not. A hip check is about leverage, not size, Hammer had the leverage and didn't have control on the back end and hurt something.

Kesler's hip/groin issues were also not about size. Everyone has a groin, he tore it.

Ehrhoffs wrist was not about size, it was about slashes, teams slash everyone, get it in a bad place it gets hurt, size doesn't make a difference.

See my point? And given we had a 2-0 lead with all those injuries and Boston's none, my guess is we would have won if that situation was reversed.

Now if you're implying if we were bigger we could go injure Boston well that's silly. Injuries are part of sport and bad luck for the most part, they aren't determined by size differential unless you're head hunting.

Now, would size have helped. Absolutely, it would have allowed better oppty's for the Sedins to have space, get to the net, get to rebounds etc. But most teams have a tough time getting through Chara and he didnt come off the ice very much, not to mention Thomas just completely stood on his head.

We do need to get bigger, both up front and especially the back end. But was it the cause of the injuries and loss? No way.
  • 0

#154 M A K A V E L I 96

M A K A V E L I 96

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,617 posts
  • Joined: 18-April 11

Posted 09 November 2012 - 02:18 PM

Posted Image
  • 0
Posted Image

#155 chrisbanks

chrisbanks

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,412 posts
  • Joined: 29-February 12

Posted 09 November 2012 - 02:53 PM

i cant believe how many people want this to happen the guy threatend to hold out and not play in the 94 playoffs to get a contract.. he was terrible with fans and media and then held out for a trade out of vancouver and didnt honor his contract.... smyle and linden should be the only ones to go up and probably sedins one day nazzy? really ? for the last 4 years of his time with us he hung it over our head that he was going to stay in sweden and not come back to the nhl bure took off and wanted nothing to do with vancouver anymore... every jersey that is retired in other buildings the players won them a CUP!!! and exceptions for captains that spent their lives with them team and didnt everything for the community and the fans its embarassing that bure is even going into the hall.
  • 0

#156 Beeekz

Beeekz

    K-Wing Regular

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 36 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 12

Posted 09 November 2012 - 02:57 PM

Thanks for the memories Pavel, you truly made Canucks hockey a whole new thing to watch in the 90's.
  • 0

#157 M A K A V E L I 96

M A K A V E L I 96

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,617 posts
  • Joined: 18-April 11

Posted 09 November 2012 - 03:30 PM

*
POPULAR

i cant believe how many people want this to happen the guy threatend to hold out and not play in the 94 playoffs to get a contract.. he was terrible with fans and media and then held out for a trade out of vancouver and didnt honor his contract.... every jersey that is retired in other buildings the players won them a CUP!!! and exceptions for captains that spent their lives with them team and didnt everything for the community and the fans its embarassing that bure is even going into the hall.


So many things wrong your rant. Bure didn't threaten to hold out during the playoffs. That was a lie the management (likely McPhee) spread to the media.

Jerseys aren't necessarily retired for cup winners, captains, and players who spent their career on the same team. Every team has different situations. The Sabres have 6 jerseys retired.

If anyone on the Canucks deserves to get their jersey retired based on merit, it's Bure. He's light years ahead of Linden, Naslund, and Smyl.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfkRRgLgyt8
  • 6
Posted Image

#158 lowest common denominator

lowest common denominator

    Comets Star

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

Posted 09 November 2012 - 03:49 PM

Not disputing we lacked size, have said that we need that before, and that the Kassian deal was smart for that reason. As you may have seen in my post I mentioned having a "Kassian in his prime" for that reason.

The injuries that happened are bad luck not an issue of size. Hamhuis made a terrific hip check on Lucic, but was unstable and hurt his hip. You can argue well its bec Lucic was so much bigger, maybe the cause maybe not. A hip check is about leverage, not size, Hammer had the leverage and didn't have control on the back end and hurt something.

Kesler's hip/groin issues were also not about size. Everyone has a groin, he tore it.

Ehrhoffs wrist was not about size, it was about slashes, teams slash everyone, get it in a bad place it gets hurt, size doesn't make a difference.

See my point? And given we had a 2-0 lead with all those injuries and Boston's none, my guess is we would have won if that situation was reversed.

Now if you're implying if we were bigger we could go injure Boston well that's silly. Injuries are part of sport and bad luck for the most part, they aren't determined by size differential unless you're head hunting.

Now, would size have helped. Absolutely, it would have allowed better oppty's for the Sedins to have space, get to the net, get to rebounds etc. But most teams have a tough time getting through Chara and he didnt come off the ice very much, not to mention Thomas just completely stood on his head.

We do need to get bigger, both up front and especially the back end. But was it the cause of the injuries and loss? No way.


To stay on topic, Bure was 5'11 190lbs. and took crap from no-one.

All this other noise about him not being a community guy or being a jerk is just school girl chitter chatter.
  • 1

#159 lowest common denominator

lowest common denominator

    Comets Star

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

Posted 09 November 2012 - 04:01 PM

i cant believe how many people want this to happen the guy threatend to hold out and not play in the 94 playoffs to get a contract.. he was terrible with fans and media and then held out for a trade out of vancouver and didnt honor his contract....


Why would you want to perpetuate lies and rumours about the best player the canucks have ever known?

As for retiring #s 22 and 33, give a few reasons. I don't see any. They sure as hell won't make the HHoF.
  • 0

#160 Where's Wellwood

Where's Wellwood

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,299 posts
  • Joined: 12-May 10

Posted 09 November 2012 - 04:18 PM

Why would you want to perpetuate lies and rumours about the best player the canucks have ever known?

As for retiring #s 22 and 33, give a few reasons. I don't see any. They sure as hell won't make the HHoF.


If Bure can make the HHoF, then the Sedins can too. They have just as many league trophys each as Bure and have made a Cup Final. They'll likely finish their NHL careers with over 1000 games played, close to a PPG pace, and they've done more for the community than Bure.

As for reasons for retiring their jerseys: They'll be the top 2 scorers in franchise history, they've both won the Art Ross, and have a Hart and Lindsay between them, they were the leaders of a Canucks team that made it to Game 7 of the Cup Final, all at a time where Crosby, Ovechkin, and Malkin are in their prime.

Edited by Where's Wellwood, 09 November 2012 - 04:26 PM.

  • 1

14diqh3.jpg
Credit to khalifawiz501 for the sig.
"There is a time and place for everything but not now."

http://forum.canucks...a-bros-game-on/


#161 lowest common denominator

lowest common denominator

    Comets Star

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

Posted 09 November 2012 - 04:46 PM

If Bure can make the HHoF, then the Sedins can too. They have just as many league trophys each as Bure and have made a Cup Final. They'll likely finish their NHL careers with over 1000 games played, close to a PPG pace, and they've done more for the community than Bure.

As for reasons for retiring their jerseys: They'll be the top 2 scorers in franchise history, they've both won the Art Ross, and have a Hart and Lindsay between them, they were the leaders of a Canucks team that made it to Game 7 of the Cup Final, all at a time where Crosby, Ovechkin, and Malkin are in their prime.


Bure having made it makes no impact on the Sedin's making it.

They are averaging 0.84 ppg, nowhere near 1.00 and they are on the downhill. The 100+point season (1 each) were mere blips. Partially due to the fact that the book is now out on the twins: Lean on them and they will bend.

Not sure what Crosby Malkin and Ovi have to do with anything here on the west coast. And Crosby hasn't been "prime" for years...anyway

As for their playoff performances, they won't be remembered well. Just like Lu.

And after they're retired, you'll look back on their stats and they will actually be pretty average. Yes they play alot of games, but they also don't give it 100% ballsout all the time, or anytime really. Thats why they end up playing most of the games every year.

I hope the Sedins play out their careers here and I know this has been a golden age for Canucks fans, but the Sedins will never hold a candle to Bure in any category, except for pifpg (punches in face/per game)
  • 1

#162 winacup

winacup

    Comets Prospect

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

Posted 09 November 2012 - 05:36 PM

the sedins and luongo have fallen flat on their faces in the playoffs every year they have been here.
any chance they had of getting into the hhof disappeared in the 2011 finals just like they did.
  • 2
Posted Image

#163 Pears

Pears

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,969 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 11

Posted 09 November 2012 - 06:25 PM

Bure should have been in the rafters before Naslund, Naslund should not be up there at all.

:picard: What a dumb statement. Naslund was one of the best players in Canucks history. He is first all time in Canucks in points, goals, game-winning goals and power play goals. Tell me that isn't worth getting your jersey retired.
  • 2

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


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


#164 Pears

Pears

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,969 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 11

Posted 09 November 2012 - 06:28 PM

the sedins and luongo have fallen flat on their faces in the playoffs every year they have been here.
any chance they had of getting into the hhof disappeared in the 2011 finals just like they did.

Guess you didn't watch this years playoffs. Henrik was easily our best player and Luongo was up there, just our team couldn't beat the demi-god that Quick was.

Just stop with your trolling, nobody likes it.
  • 1

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


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


#165 lowest common denominator

lowest common denominator

    Comets Star

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

Posted 09 November 2012 - 09:34 PM

:picard: What a dumb statement. Naslund was one of the best players in Canucks history. He is first all time in Canucks in points, goals, game-winning goals and power play goals. Tell me that isn't worth getting your jersey retired.


Naslund is top 10 in Canucks history but really didn't accomplish anything of note. He came of age here and, like the twins, had one 100+ pt season and alot of sub 80 pt seasons.
Naslund has a 0.66 ppg reg season avg. with a +6 . Very Mediocre
His playoff record is worse than regular season and he never made it past the 2nd rnd.
He stuck it out with the canucks through some of the darkest times and perhaps should have made his exit a few seasons earlier than he did.
Like his successors, Hank and Dank, he also rarely played the physical game, especially towards the last few years when he would consistently give up possesion to avoid contact.

Bure, in his sleep, would make Naslund look like he was sleeping.




Smyl #12
Linden # 16
Bure #10
  • 2

#166 CookieCrumbs

CookieCrumbs

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,039 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 11

Posted 09 November 2012 - 09:55 PM

i cant believe how many people want this to happen the guy threatend to hold out and not play in the 94 playoffs to get a contract.. he was terrible with fans and media and then held out for a trade out of vancouver and didnt honor his contract.... smyle and linden should be the only ones to go up and probably sedins one day nazzy? really ? for the last 4 years of his time with us he hung it over our head that he was going to stay in sweden and not come back to the nhl bure took off and wanted nothing to do with vancouver anymore... every jersey that is retired in other buildings the players won them a CUP!!! and exceptions for captains that spent their lives with them team and didnt everything for the community and the fans its embarassing that bure is even going into the hall.


You're an idiot.
  • 1

#167 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,473 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 10 November 2012 - 10:50 AM

Not disputing we lacked size, have said that we need that before, and that the Kassian deal was smart for that reason. As you may have seen in my post I mentioned having a "Kassian in his prime" for that reason.

The injuries that happened are bad luck not an issue of size. Hamhuis made a terrific hip check on Lucic, but was unstable and hurt his hip. You can argue well its bec Lucic was so much bigger, maybe the cause maybe not. A hip check is about leverage, not size, Hammer had the leverage and didn't have control on the back end and hurt something.

Kesler's hip/groin issues were also not about size. Everyone has a groin, he tore it.

Ehrhoffs wrist was not about size, it was about slashes, teams slash everyone, get it in a bad place it gets hurt, size doesn't make a difference.

See my point? And given we had a 2-0 lead with all those injuries and Boston's none, my guess is we would have won if that situation was reversed.

Now if you're implying if we were bigger we could go injure Boston well that's silly. Injuries are part of sport and bad luck for the most part, they aren't determined by size differential unless you're head hunting.

Now, would size have helped. Absolutely, it would have allowed better oppty's for the Sedins to have space, get to the net, get to rebounds etc. But most teams have a tough time getting through Chara and he didnt come off the ice very much, not to mention Thomas just completely stood on his head.

We do need to get bigger, both up front and especially the back end. But was it the cause of the injuries and loss? No way.


Hamhuis had the groin injury, Kesler was both groin and shoulder, and Ehrhoff was a shoulder injury.
  • 0

HiromiOshimaB.gif


#168 winacup

winacup

    Comets Prospect

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

Posted 10 November 2012 - 11:06 AM

Guess you didn't watch this years playoffs. Henrik was easily our best player and Luongo was up there, just our team couldn't beat the demi-god that Quick was.

Just stop with your trolling, nobody likes it.


my point exacty.
you're never going to win the cup when your go to players are physically and mentally soft.
  • 1
Posted Image

#169 TOMapleLaughs

TOMapleLaughs

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,942 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 05

Posted 10 November 2012 - 11:08 AM

Those who believe in this misguided rant are the reason that Bure's jersey hasn't been retired thus far. But over the years, more and more people are getting a clue.

I'm curious as to what Bure will say (or mumble) during the ceremony. It could potentially be really awkward. Hopefully his is well-prepared.

Actually, i don't expect anything but typical Bure. Says just what needs to be said and that's it.

i cant believe how many people want this to happen the guy threatend to hold out and not play in the 94 playoffs to get a contract.. he was terrible with fans and media and then held out for a trade out of vancouver and didnt honor his contract.... smyle and linden should be the only ones to go up and probably sedins one day nazzy? really ? for the last 4 years of his time with us he hung it over our head that he was going to stay in sweden and not come back to the nhl bure took off and wanted nothing to do with vancouver anymore... every jersey that is retired in other buildings the players won them a CUP!!! and exceptions for captains that spent their lives with them team and didnt everything for the community and the fans its embarassing that bure is even going into the hall.


  • 0
Posted Image

#170 TOMapleLaughs

TOMapleLaughs

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,942 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 05

Posted 10 November 2012 - 11:09 AM

1. Wrong thread.

2. Yawn.

my point exacty.
you're never going to win the cup when your go to players are physically and mentally soft.


  • 0
Posted Image

#171 lowest common denominator

lowest common denominator

    Comets Star

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

Posted 10 November 2012 - 11:19 AM

Not disputing we lacked size, have said that we need that before, and that the Kassian deal was smart for that reason. As you may have seen in my post I mentioned having a "Kassian in his prime" for that reason.

The injuries that happened are bad luck not an issue of size. Hamhuis made a terrific hip check on Lucic, but was unstable and hurt his hip. You can argue well its bec Lucic was so much bigger, maybe the cause maybe not. A hip check is about leverage, not size, Hammer had the leverage and didn't have control on the back end and hurt something.

Kesler's hip/groin issues were also not about size. Everyone has a groin, he tore it.

Ehrhoffs wrist was not about size, it was about slashes, teams slash everyone, get it in a bad place it gets hurt, size doesn't make a difference.

See my point? And given we had a 2-0 lead with all those injuries and Boston's none, my guess is we would have won if that situation was reversed.

Now if you're implying if we were bigger we could go injure Boston well that's silly. Injuries are part of sport and bad luck for the most part, they aren't determined by size differential unless you're head hunting.

Now, would size have helped. Absolutely, it would have allowed better oppty's for the Sedins to have space, get to the net, get to rebounds etc. But most teams have a tough time getting through Chara and he didnt come off the ice very much, not to mention Thomas just completely stood on his head.

We do need to get bigger, both up front and especially the back end. But was it the cause of the injuries and loss? No way.


In summation, our core players are soft and easily injured. Big helps but if you just don't have the ability to reach within and compete at the same level as your opponent, you lose.

Whats the old saying about the size of the dog in the fight and the size of the fight in the dog?

I hate to sound like ignorant old Cherry but we need less swede and more canuck on the canucks. Look at the recent cup winners, loaded with canadian boys that know what it takes to win. Go ahead and bring up the red wings if you want but we all know its true.

And Kassian might be past his prime, no-one knows yet.
  • 2

#172 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,473 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 10 November 2012 - 12:01 PM

Naslund is top 10 in Canucks history but really didn't accomplish anything of note. He came of age here and, like the twins, had one 100+ pt season and alot of sub 80 pt seasons.
Naslund has a 0.66 ppg reg season avg. with a +6 . Very Mediocre
His playoff record is worse than regular season and he never made it past the 2nd rnd.
He stuck it out with the canucks through some of the darkest times and perhaps should have made his exit a few seasons earlier than he did.
Like his successors, Hank and Dank, he also rarely played the physical game, especially towards the last few years when he would consistently give up possesion to avoid contact.

Bure, in his sleep, would make Naslund look like he was sleeping.




Smyl #12
Linden # 16
Bure #10


Including playoffs....
Naslund 929 games with Canucks & captain for 8 years
Bure 492 games with Canucks

I don't think anybody is questioning Bure's talent. The real question is: did he actually do enough here to warrant the teams highest honor? I don't think he did. Simply put, without the significance of winning a cup, he didn't play here long enough. I don't think a team should retire a players number simply because he had talent and played there a little while.

To be honest I would have put Shanahan in the HHoF ahead of Bure.
  • 0

HiromiOshimaB.gif


#173 debluvscanucks

debluvscanucks

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Super Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 25,396 posts
  • Joined: 19-February 08

Posted 10 November 2012 - 12:08 PM

I honestly don't know why people feel the need to throw some under the bus in making comparisons to others. Sure, prove a point about one player but also consider that different dynamics contribute to a team and while one guy might be a dazzling, brilliant scorer who that just seems to come naturally to another workhorse who shows up every night and puts in a complete effort also is an asset.

This "my Dad's better than yours" mentality is fairly reflective of the overall attitude in this city that tends to really be tough on players. Why not embrace all of them for what they brought to the team?

Honestly, anyone arguing against the impact and significance of Bure's time in Vancouver likely wasn't part of it and is getting their info from articles that they read. It was an undeniable positive thing to have a player of Bure's caliber here, generating a buzz in this city. The entire team was workhorses and underdogs, but he lit up the arena and wow'd people. Both ends of that were important and contributed to what made that team come SO close.

People throwing Nazzy, Trevor, etc. under the bus don't have to do that to prove their point. All of the players being named brought something to this team and anyone arguing that doesn't have a clue.
  • 2

Posted Image


#174 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,473 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 10 November 2012 - 12:40 PM

I honestly don't know why people feel the need to throw some under the bus in making comparisons to others. Sure, prove a point about one player but also consider that different dynamics contribute to a team and while one guy might be a dazzling, brilliant scorer who that just seems to come naturally to another workhorse who shows up every night and puts in a complete effort also is an asset.

This "my Dad's better than yours" mentality is fairly reflective of the overall attitude in this city that tends to really be tough on players. Why not embrace all of them for what they brought to the team?

Honestly, anyone arguing against the impact and significance of Bure's time in Vancouver likely wasn't part of it and is getting their info from articles that they read. It was an undeniable positive thing to have a player of Bure's caliber here, generating a buzz in this city. The entire team was workhorses and underdogs, but he lit up the arena and wow'd people. Both ends of that were important and contributed to what made that team come SO close.

People throwing Nazzy, Trevor, etc. under the bus don't have to do that to prove their point. All of the players being named brought something to this team and anyone arguing that doesn't have a clue.


A common misconception there Deb. Some us simply aren't influenced by emotional childhood hero worship memories regarding Bure. Some of us were actually adults when he played here. Most that I know in my age group agree that Bure wasn't here long enough to warrant retiring his number. It has nothing to do with his talent. The issue is his lacking length of service and significant contributions such as cup victories and community service.

Although I do agree that attempting to degrade those that have had their numbers retired in an attempt to justify retiring Bure/s number is pretty sad.
  • 0

HiromiOshimaB.gif


#175 lowest common denominator

lowest common denominator

    Comets Star

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

Posted 10 November 2012 - 12:59 PM

Obviously, some people hold Nazzy in a higher regard than others, but as I've stated, he really accomplished nothing of note in his time here and his stats are severely avg. Not trying to bring him down but let's be realistic, by hanging #19 in the rafters, we have seriously lowered the bar for this honour and now the door is open to all kinds of mediocrity. If you can't look back objectively, then you are holding onto some kind of "childhood hero memories" of Nazzy, because he was average.

Bure didn't "play here for a little while". He was here for 7 seasons. And he was the most exciting player the canucks have ever known. And for that, he was railroaded out of town by piss poor management and negative media sentiment, which continues to this day and it is sickening.

Naslund, although captain, was pretty ineffectual.I always laughed when he would kind of pretend to get into the scrum and then easily be the first one to leave it, or only start yapping when the ref was between him and the opposing player. I appreciate Nazzy's contribution but I don't know why he is put on such a pedastal.
Deb. are you suggesting that someone should have their jersey retired based on games played and philanthropic hours put in?
  • 1

#176 lowest common denominator

lowest common denominator

    Comets Star

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

Posted 10 November 2012 - 01:44 PM

A common misconception there Deb. Some us simply aren't influenced by emotional childhood hero worship memories regarding Bure. Some of us were actually adults when he played here. Most that I know in my age group agree that Bure wasn't here long enough to warrant retiring his number. It has nothing to do with his talent. The issue is his lacking length of service and significant contributions such as cup victories and community service.

Although I do agree that attempting to degrade those that have had their numbers retired in an attempt to justify retiring Bure/s number is pretty sad.


Why are you perpetuating rumour and inuendo that we all know is not true?

Is that you Dan Russel?

Edited by scottiecanuck, 10 November 2012 - 01:45 PM.

  • 0

#177 TOMapleLaughs

TOMapleLaughs

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,942 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 05

Posted 10 November 2012 - 04:14 PM

Obviously, other factors trump Baggins' concerns about the length of his stay, his supposed lack of community service, and the lack of cup victories. Such as the hall-of-fame nod and the fact that he was the most-talented Canuck of all.

However, Baggins' concerns aren't even warranted. Length of stay? Like Ray Bourque in Colorado and Pat Lafontaine in Buffalo, that doesn't matter. Lack of cup wins? Um, no. If that mattered, a lot of names would have to come down, league-wide, including all of ours and Marcel Dionne's, for example.

So what's left is this apparent lack of community service that he performed.

First off, it's disputable what he, not being captain Trevor Linden, was able or allowed to do. It's also disputable whether or not he performed community service. Apparently he did, according to photographic evidence and testimonials. And lastly, it's disputable whether it's even important for the guy to do it. In any case, no, he's not Trevor Linden. Nobody is.

These factors aren't the real issue, actually. The real issue is that he left us. But while he was traded, you can say that his heart remained in Vancouver. Like Linden's.

The other issue is that some of us cannot move on and forgive him. (Even though what he did doesn't require forgiveness.)

As for being 'all grown up' and being emotionally detatched from Bure's impact on this club, i can't help but feel that is a line served up to justify a completely biased and petty viewpoint on the player stemming from his departure. To be so filled with ill-will towards this guy years later? Pretty emotional if you ask me.

I remember the Bure heyday quite clearly, from his first game against the jets onward. Fans of ALL ages had a huge boner for the guy and fans of all ages where choked when he left. I was old enough to figure out what was going on when he left, and i'm certainly mature enough now to move the hell on. But if people don't want to, that's alright. It changes nothing.

A lot of people were anti-Nazzy jersey as well. Considering that both Bure and Nazzy aren't Canadian, while Smyl and Linden are, i'd say it's fairly obvious what the other issue is. If these guys were Canadian? No problem, eh?
  • 0
Posted Image

#178 mbal23

mbal23

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,717 posts
  • Joined: 02-May 11

Posted 10 November 2012 - 04:49 PM

A common misconception there Deb. Some us simply aren't influenced by emotional childhood hero worship memories regarding Bure. Some of us were actually adults when he played here. Most that I know in my age group agree that Bure wasn't here long enough to warrant retiring his number. It has nothing to do with his talent. The issue is his lacking length of service and significant contributions such as cup victories and community service.

Although I do agree that attempting to degrade those that have had their numbers retired in an attempt to justify retiring Bure/s number is pretty sad.


Your mad at his lack of community service? Why does that matter? What if he was shy? Or not a people person. Or crazy vancity fans would leave him alone?
  • 0

#179 Hockey Fever

Hockey Fever

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,834 posts
  • Joined: 03-January 09

Posted 10 November 2012 - 06:26 PM

FAR OVERDUE.
  • 0

Posted Image

NHL Wikipedia : Operates Major Ice Hockey League known for predetermining Stanley Cup winners and rampant corrupt officiating

"I would love for (the Canucks) to win the Stanley Cup because that would put to bed all the talk about 1994", he says facetiously".
Nathan Lafayette on hitting the post in game seven of the Stanley Cup.


#180 Pears

Pears

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,969 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 11

Posted 10 November 2012 - 07:35 PM

my point exacty.
you're never going to win the cup when your go to players are physically and mentally soft.

And you're still trying to call the Sedins 'soft'. Grow up. Go watch Henrik's play this playoffs then get back to me. Or are you too scared to be proven wrong? Is that the case?
  • 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


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





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.