Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

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


hockeyville88

Recommended Posts

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...