Pavel meeting with the media today, possible jersey retirement?

[-AJ-]

You're in the minority here bud. Time to face the facts. His number will be retired.

You can keep whining about it. Or show some respect to a Canuck legend.

[DeNiro]

From what I see, he isn't whining about it, he's just explaining why he doesn't agree with the decision. I see no whining.

[Westcoasting]

Who here watched hockey in the 80's? Tony Tanti scored about the same number of goals as Bure so shouldn't his number be retired then?

[canuckelhead70]

PAVEL BURE AND PAT QUINN TURNED THE CANUCKS INTO A TEAM WORTH WATCHING

Cam Charron

November 13 2012 11:00AM

If you're a longtime Vancouver Canucks fan born from the mid-1980s on, you came onto the team in one of two distinct eras. The most recent is the West Coast Express era, one that ended a trend of sagging attendance and teams at General Motors Place. The West Coast Express era was known for Markus Naslund's near-miss as the league's top scorer, for http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjZ26WaBBpE, and for regular callers on Vancouver sports radio decrying the Sedin twins as not providing ample secondary scoring.

The first is the Pavel Bure era. I have a few cognitive memories from the 1992-1993 season, but unlike the time between 2007-2010, the gaps in the era aren't due to excessive alcohol consumption through undergrad, but rather because I was too friggin' young to know anybody on the team.

Patrick wrote about the importance of Pavel Bure last night:

The Russian Rocket pulled hockey in Vancouver into a nearly-perpetual offensive age. There had been talented players here before - Andre Boudrias, Thomas Gradin, Patrik Sundstrom, Petri Skriko, Tony Tanti - but none had ever ushered in a mindset. Bure did that. Canucks fans came to expect goals and exciting team play.

Years later, it was a mentality that Brian Burke highlighted: he made it clear that Vancouver fans were owed entertaining hockey; that it would be easy to turn into the New Jersey of the west, but ethically he would never allowed that to happen. That was a legacy of Bure.

The Canucks would forever be a team that scored goals.

Bure did transform hockey in Vancouver, somehow. To those fans who weren't born in the late-1980s, I pity you, because from the time I was born right up until the second riot and a full-on Centre Ice package soured my unquestioning devotion to my hometown team, they were actually kind of good.

In fact, before Bure showed up, the Canucks had a single season, 1991-92, better than the league average in goal-scoring over a season. Bure arrived in 1992 and since then, the Canucks have only been below league average in scoring three times: 1998-99, 2006-07 and 2007-08.

I graphed it out, in relation to the average as a rate. The NHL as a whole had a 1.00 rate each season, and the Canucks were either above or below that, obviously:

That said, the Canucks were also aided in the 1990s and 2000s by the fact that Wayne Gretzky and Phil Esposito were no longer in the league scoring goals every imaginable way, but it's fun that in the 1990s, the Canucks had one of those guys. 1993 was a fairly high-scoring year in hockey, with teams generating 3.63 goals per game, remaining the highest since the Edmonton Oilers' last Cup victory. The Canucks scored a franchise best 4.12 goals every game, and had one of the five players to have a 60-goal season that year.

Bure would be the only guy to repeat those goal totals in 1993-94.

But there's also no causation between Bure's success and the success that the Canucks saw this past decade offensively. I think it's fairly noble to assume that, given a taste of greatness, fans wouldn't put up with an inferior product, but there was a dead era between the Bure trade and perhaps the trade that brought Trevor Linden back to Vancouver where there was waning interest and empty seats.

He was the first of many, many offensive stars that the Canucks have seen since. Newer fans recognize the West Coast Express, even newer fans recognize the Sedins. Nobody's first Canuck jersey had Mark Messier's name and number stitched on the back:

Canucks % NHL GF/G Canucks GF/G Pre Bure 0.91 3.57 3.26 Post Bure 1.05 2.93 3.08 Pre Quinn 0.91 3.57 3.25 Post Quinn 1.06 2.91 3.08

The other thing I wanted to do was to stack Bure's career against a host of other legendary Canucks. This takes on a bit of a "team stat" approach, but there are few good methods for comparing players cross-era when the information is sparse:

Canucks % NHL GF/G Canucks GF/G Henrik Sedin 1.08 2.79 3.01 Pavel Bure 1.06 3.16 3.36 Markus Naslund 1.04 2.79 2.91 Trevor Linden 1.01 3.13 3.17 Thomas Gradin 0.92 3.80 3.49 Don Lever 0.91 3.37 3.06 Stan Smyl 0.90 3.75 3.39

Not surprisingly, the team has been at its best under the watchful eye of Henrik Sedin. The Canuck years between 2001 and present day are plentiful in both goals and wins (if you've read the Song of Ice and Fire books, calling modern-day fans 'green men' is quite an appropriate term). But it does seem that, since Bure, the torch has been passed off, as Patrick put it, to Naslund and to Henrik Sedin, who have kept the Canucks above water offensively.

The point being that, at some moment in time, this team became pretty good and a lot of that seems to coincide with Bure and Quinn's arrival in Vancouver. Retire Bure's number? Heck yes, and while you're at it, pull down Orland Kurtenbach's nostalgic display and celebrate an original Canuck and former coach who actually saw a modicum of success at the helm.

[DeNiro]

Who here watched hockey in the 80's? Tony Tanti scored about the same number of goals as Bure so shouldn't his number be retired then?

[Baggins]

That is not his point. Either you are dense or you are purposely ignoring/distorting his argument.

The argument is that if Pavel Bure is good enough to be elected to the HOF and if Pavel Bure played the majority of his games with the Vancouver Canucks, should Bure be good enough to have his jersey retired by the Vancouver Canucks? He did play well in Florida, but arguably the main reason he was elected to the HOF was because of his play in Vancouver. Why shouldn't the Vancouver Canucks recognize this?

Did you not watch him in the early to mid 90s? I don't see how his play doesn't merit his jersey retirement. Shouldn't it be quality over quantity? Naslund only played 884 games in a Canucks uniform, certainly more than Bure, but it took Naslund five seasons and 326 games before he started scoring at a PPG pace. He was a -25 in that time.

Bure deserves it. He took the years he was given and dominated the crap out of them.

[Baggins]

Well if he keeps complaining about it after the decision has pretty much been made, I consider that whining.

It's done. It's pretty obvious his number is going up. So what good does it do to give all the reasons it shouldn't be up there? This thread should be about appreciating one of the greatest players in Canucks history.

[Baggins]

I don't see how any intelligent person could argue against not retiring our only Hall of Fame player. Hell, even the Panthers retired his number. It's embarassing the Canucks didn't do it sooner.

[DeNiro]

Number retirement is about a players relationship/accomplishments with a franchise.

[Hairy Kneel]

Trolling on Bure is a douche move.

[DeNiro]

Other former Canucks in the HHoF:

Messier

Neeley

Larionov

Florida has never retired a players number.

Do try to get something right.

[DeNiro]

Did I miss the announcement? Or are you making an assumption?

[Westcoasting]

287 is about the same number as 437?

Did he have back to back 60 goal, 100+ point seasons? Or lead the Canucks in points on a run to game 7 of the finals?

Bure is in the Hall of Fame. You don't get in the hall of fame unless you were one of the greatest players in the history of the NHL.

I don't see how any intelligent person could argue against not retiring our only Hall of Fame player. Hell, even the Panthers retired his number. It's embarassing the Canucks didn't do it sooner.

[Baggins]

Honored, retired, same thing. It's sad that they at least paid respect to him before we did.

Messier and Neely. Really? You would compare what they did in their time here to Bure? None of those players went into the Hall of Fame in Canucks colors, I can assure you that. Those weren't "our" players.

[miked1101]

You said, "our only Hall of Fame player." Are those listed not former Canucks in the HHoF? If they are then Bure isn't the "only" former Canuck in the HHoF. And as I've said repeatedly, the HHoF is a distinctly different honor from a franchise retiring a players number. One does not make the other automatic.

What did Bure actually do here? He was exciting. He was a very good goal scorer. But what major accomplishments did he have as a Canuck that outweighs how few games he actually played here? That's really the point I've been making all along. Cup victories? Nope. NHL records? Nope. Scoring titles? Nope. League MVP? Nope. So exactly what mighty deeds counter the lack of games played here? Yes a was a very talented player. Yes he was exciting to watch. I just don't see those as reason enough to give the teams highest honor.

Ring of Honor is comparable to what Florida did for him. That's what he should receive here.

[Baggins]

• Vancouver Canucks' single-season record, most points by a rookie - 60 in 1991–92 (tied with Ivan Hlinka, 1981–82)

• Vancouver Canucks' single-season record, most goals - 60 in 1992–93 and 1993–94

• Vancouver Canucks' all-time playoffs record, most goals - 34 (tied with Trevor Linden)

• Vancouver Canucks' all-time record, most shorthanded goals - 24^[42]

• Vancouver Canucks' single-game record, most goals - four versus the Winnipeg Jets on October 12, 1992 (tied with Rosaire Paiement, Bobby Schmautz, Rick Blight, Petri Skriko, Greg Adams, Tony Tanti, Martin Gelinas, Markus Näslund and Daniel Sedin)^[42]

• ^{Calder Memorial Trophy 1992}

• ^{NHL All-Star Game selection1993, 1994, 1996, 1997, 1998}

• ^{NHL First All-Star Team 1994}

[miked1101]

Well those are Canuck records and really not that many. Compare that to the number franchise records Naslund holds. Yet despite his franchise records combined with the number of games played here, many don't think Naslunds number should have been retired. Regarding NHL recognition as a Canuck, Naslund was a first all star more times, had more all star game appearances, was a Hart finalist and won a Lester B. Pearson. In other words, Naslund had more league wide recognition than Bure in addition to more team records and about double the games played for the Canucks. Naslund actually accomplished more with this franchise.

So again, what sets Bure apart to make up for the lack of games played here? You see when a player doesn't have that length of service to a team there should be some major accomplishments with the franchise to make up for it such as Stanley cups, NHL awards, or NHL records. Bure is lacking in major accomplishments as a Canuck to compensate for the lack of games. The majority of number retirements involve players with either major NHL accomplishments, games played for a franchise, or a combination of the two.

[canuckelhead70]

So again, what sets Bure apart to make up for the lack of games played here? You see when a player doesn't have that length of service to a team there should be some major accomplishments with the franchise to make up for it such as Stanley cups, NHL awards, or NHL records. Bure is lacking in major accomplishments as a Canuck to compensate for the lack of games. The majority of number retirements involve players with either major NHL accomplishments, games played for a franchise, or a combination of the two.

[canuckhound73]

He was elected to the HHoF because of his career as a whole. Number retirement is about a players relationship/accomplishments with a franchise. Two distinctly different honors. One doesn't automatically qualify the other.

I've been following the NHL since the 60's. So I wasn't watching Bure play through the eyes of a star struck child. Being a good player, or being exciting, isn't enough of a reason for a team to give it's highest honor. He just doesn't have the accomplishments as a Canuck to make up for the lack of games played here.

[lowest common denominator]

Baggins, I don't get you. You say you are a canucks fan but disparage Bure and try to minimize his impact every chance you get. I don't get it man, what happened? Did Bure snub you for an autograpf at some point, maybe you can get that rectified.

I'm picturing you on a rocking chair on your front porch, yelling at traffic and passersby...

Are you really 70+ years old? If so, good on ya for learning the internet but keep your opinions about Bure to yourself, you are embarassing us.