Archived

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

canuckseh29

Pat Quinn and who else? The Canucks Ring of Honour.

Ring of Honour.    133 members have voted

  1. 1. Who else deserves to be in the Ring of Honour?

    • Roger Neilsen
    • Mattias Ohlund
    • Frank Grifiths
    • Frank/Lester Patrick
    • Roberto Luongo
    • Richard Brodeur
    • Gino Odjick
    • Tiger Williams
    • Jyrki Lumme
    • Cyclone Taylor
    • Jim Robson
    • Phil Maloney
      0
    • Mickey MacKay
      0
    • Ed Jovanaski
    • Sami Salo
    • Wilfred "Smokey" Harris
      0
    • Jack Adams
    • Alain Vigneault

Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

22 posts in this topic

The Canucks will honour Pat Quinn on April 13th, by putting him into the Ring of Honour. This marks the 5th person to be included, and first since the 40th anniversary season. For a while it seemed as if the Canucks had forgotten or abandoned this idea, but his induction should revitalize the debate of who else deserves to go in? By including a former coach/gm (he did play for the Canucks, but obviously was not remembered for this short period) it opens the debate for other builders to be included.

The debate should fall first to which player will be next? Its pretty clear that the list is short, so why would the Canucks take such a long time to re-start their inductions? First on my list is King Richard Brodeur, the goalie that carried the Canucks during the 1982 cup run. I think that choice is a slam dunk. Same with Mattias Ohlund, who gave us 11 solid years as our best defenseman. I also include tough guys and fan favorites Gino Odjick and Tiger Williams, because both of them were heroes during their time here. Canucks fans should never forget these players. What about guys like Sami Salo, Ed Jovanaski or Jyrki Lumme? What about Luongo, the best goalie the Canucks have ever had? (I have purposely left of players on the current Canucks roster like Kesler, Burrows or the Sedins, because their impact on the franchise can not be measured until they have retired or left for other reasons).

In the off ice department i would for sure include in the debate Frank Grifiths, Roger Neilsen and Jim Robson (who has an entire Broadcast Gondola named after him, but should probably be placed in the ROH as well).

Should the Canucks also honour players from the Millionaires Era? Or the WHL Canucks of the 50's and 60's? Many people have heard of Frank and Lester Patrick, who won Stanley Cups in the challenge cup era for the Vancouver Millionaires and Victoria Cougars, or Fred "Cyclone" Taylor who was the star player lured to the west coast? What about leading scorers Wilfred "Smokey" Harris, Mickey MacKay and Jack Adams. Other hall of famers played during this era as well. The Vancouver Canucks of the WHL is obviously before my time (and im sure most of those on CDC), but someone like Phil Maloney played 14 seasons in the WHL for the Canucks, appearing in 818 games and scored 923 points.

Does the ROH only apply to the 1970 - present Canucks, or should it be opened up to great people from Vancouver hockey history?

So, the question is, who is next and where do YOU draw the line?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could be talking several years down the road..but how about AV..?

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could be talking several years down the road..but how about AV..?

Good call. Added him to the poll. Probably one of the best coaches we've ever had. The other two Stanley Cup run coaches are on there, so why not.

I thought about Marc Crawford as well, but kept him off.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the record, mine would be Cyclone Taylor, Richard Brodeur, Gino Odkick, Tiger Williams, Frank/Lester Patrick, Roger Neilsen, Mattias Ohlund, Jim Robson and Roberto Luongo.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lu doesn't deserve ROH, he deserves to get his number retired.

I would have agreed had he played out his career here, but because he only ends up with 8 seasons (and the fact that he wears #1) make it a lot more difficult to retire his number. I always have been and always will be a big fan of his. Maybe the 2010 Gold Medal helps his cause.... !?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have agreed had he played out his career here, but because he only ends up with 8 seasons (and the fact that he wears #1) make it a lot more difficult to retire his number. I always have been and always will be a big fan of his. Maybe the 2010 Gold Medal helps his cause.... !?

Similarly related goalie Dominik Hasek just got his number retired by the Sabres. Spent 9 season there, took em to the finals but came just short, best goaltenders of their respective franchise, and have won Olympic gold.

...I think that's a hint the Canucks should do the same with Lu and raise his number to the rafters.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tony Tanti, Doug Lidster, Greg Adams should be considerations. Lou once his career is over.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd prefer to see them keep it to the club and not the Millionaires or WHL players/coaches. Of this list Ohlund makes sense. Too bad Cloutier had no playoff success as, prior to Luongo, he really was one of the better goalies (regular season).

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Voting Alain Vigneault, nominating Mark Messier.

April Fool's was yesterday

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Should the Canucks also honour players from the Millionaires Era? Or the WHL Canucks of the 50's and 60's? Many people have heard of Frank and Lester Patrick, who won Stanley Cups in the challenge cup era for the Vancouver Millionaires and Victoria Cougars, or Fred "Cyclone" Taylor who was the star player lured to the west coast? What about leading scorers Wilfred "Smokey" Harris, Mickey MacKay and Jack Adams. Other hall of famers played during this era as well. The Vancouver Canucks of the WHL is obviously before my time (and im sure most of those on CDC), but someone like Phil Maloney played 14 seasons in the WHL for the Canucks, appearing in 818 games and scored 923 points.

Does the ROH only apply to the 1970 - present Canucks, or should it be opened up to great people from Vancouver hockey history?

So, the question is, who is next and where do YOU draw the line?

I say it should only include 1970 to present Canucks. Although they were based in Vancouver, those are completely different teams.

Of your list, I voted for Frank Griffiths. He kept the Canucks in Vancouver when they were in danger of moving.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I vote no one on that list and no one in the pipeline. The ROH should be reserved for guys who aren't quite in the category of jersey retirement but well above the mean. Pretty much every person you listed above had average NHL careers. This all boils down to an inferiority complex if you ask me. Like as though we have to celebrate something because our rafters are empty in comparison to other more storied franchises.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel like it should be the Canucks Ring of Honour, not the Vancouver Hockey Ring of Honour. So guys like Cylcone Taylor and the Patricks shouldn't be in IMO.

For guys that should be in, I said Ohlund (best all-time defender), Neilson (legendary coach, with a legendary run), Luongo (not quite number retirement), and Robson (long-time commentator).

Other close ones are AV and Williams.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel like it should be the Canucks Ring of Honour, not the Vancouver Hockey Ring of Honour. So guys like Cylcone Taylor and the Patricks shouldn't be in IMO.

For guys that should be in, I said Ohlund (best all-time defender), Neilson (legendary coach, with a legendary run), Luongo (not quite number retirement), and Robson (long-time commentator).

Other close ones are AV and Williams.

Neilson has a statue outside and Robson has the brodcast gondola named after him. Seems like enough to me for those two. Ohlund and Luongo? meh. I wouldn't be upset if neither gets any honours from the organization.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

#7 Boudrias: heart of a Canuck started here.

Gradin: not just from his playing days but his scouting as well.

Roger Neilsen: Got Harry Neale out of the way and took his team to the finals. Should have won the 2 on the Island.

Gino: rode shotgun not just for Bure but all the Canucks including Linden.

I have never thought that Naslund's # should have been retired but the whole WCE line could be ROH candidates. It could/should have happened on the same night. On the same basis Tony Tanti and Donnie Lever could be considered.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

#7 Boudrias: heart of a Canuck started here.

Gradin: not just from his playing days but his scouting as well.

Roger Neilsen: Got Harry Neale out of the way and took his team to the finals. Should have won the 2 on the Island.

Gino: rode shotgun not just for Bure but all the Canucks including Linden.

I have never thought that Naslund's # should have been retired but the whole WCE line could be ROH candidates. It could/should have happened on the same night. On the same basis Tony Tanti and Donnie Lever could be considered.

Gradin is already in the ROH.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Arthur Griffiths had the vision to build a downtown arena entirely financed without taxpayer contribution. He had to take on Seattle-based investors who eventually screwed him out of the business before selling to the Aquilinis. Arthur set the team up to be successful at the box office for years to come. Brian Burke, at roughly the same time, took a team that was playing to 12 thousand fans on most nights and filled those empty seats. Jim Robson, being originally a radio broadcaster, knew exactly how to describe the play over the radio so that the listener always knew where the puck was and who had it. And finally, Alain Vigneault sets marks for coaching success in Vancouver that will stand a very long time.

But Arthur Griffiths for sure.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.