Bure vs Boeser

[-AJ-]

When Boeser began his rookie season, it became clear that he was on pace to challenge Bure as the best Canuck rookie of all-time. Still, he had to be consistent. And he was. He kept scoring and scoring. Unfortunately for many of us, Boeser suffered injuries just before he could catch Bure in the rookie records. Bure finished with 34 goals in 1991-92 to Boeser's 29 and Bure (and Hlinka) had 60 points to Boeser's 55. Bure wins this time.

 

But did he? Although Bure appears to top Boeser in most statistics for their rookie seasons, there are several factors to consider here. I made a table to lay some of them out (this is obviously not all that you can consider, but it's something):

 

 

I want to make it EXTREMELY CLEAR, that I am not comparing Bure later on in his career to 29-goal Boeser. This is NOT a comparison of 60- or 50-goal Bure to Boeser, but strictly a comparison of their rookie seasons. There's no question that Bure went on to a be a superstar in his heyday, and Boeser has yet to do that. The focus of this comparison is on their rookie campaigns.

 

In the end, I see that Boeser and Bure were very close in all their primary offensive statistics and taking that into account along with the difference in scoring for their respective eras, I'd personally put Boeser's rookie season ahead of Bure's. Still, there are other factors that don't show up as clearly on the stat sheet. How were they defensively? How much were they carried by their teammates? How much did they carry the team themselves and make things happen? Many of these questions are hard for me to answer, as I wasn't around back in 1991-92 to witness Bure's great rookie season. All that said, my vote still goes to Boeser's rookie season, but it's not by a long shot; Boeser's rookie year only barely edges out Bure's 1991-92 season in my estimation. We can only hope Boeser's sophomore year is as good as Bure's.

 

I brought this up briefly in the Boeser player thread a while back, but I wanted to see what the larger audience of CDC thought about it.

[JeremyCuddles]

Hard to tell just from the numbers, and I didn't get to see Bure play that year so I can't really tell how great he was. How old was Bure at this point of his career? That'll be my tiebreaker. Lol.

[Rick Blight]

6 minutes ago, N7Nucks said:

Hard to tell just from the numbers, and I didn't get to see Bure play that year so I can't really tell how great he was. How old was Bure at this point of his career? That'll be my tiebreaker. Lol.

He was 20

[JeremyCuddles]

1 minute ago, Rick Blight said:

He was 20

Bout the same age, doesn't really help. I'll leave this debate to the more seasoned fans that got to see both players. Lol. The fact that Boeser's rookie season is being compared to Bure's is pretty sweat though.

[NHL'er]

It's too close to tell so edge goes to Boeser for having some sick flow.

 

[Tiger-Hearted]

Bure also played on a much, much better team. The '91-'92 Canucks went wire-to-wire in first place and finished 4th overall. 

[Rick Blight]

Really difficult to compare but I would take Bure's rookie season over Boeser's. Bure was absolutely electrifying right from his very 1st shift.This is what Kirk McLean had to say about him....and the crowd reaction was like this every time he touched the puck all season.

"

Kirk McLean skated behind his net toward a sliding puck. He reached out and stopped it. For a moment, he waited.

 

The goalie had done so countless times during his career in hockey, an unremarkable and routine play. But what happened on this night, Nov. 5, 1991, he would never forget. After a beat, McLean’s newest teammate on the Vancouver Canucks came rushing toward him. In one motion he swooped in, received the puck from his goalie and was off. McLean returned to his crouch in front of the net, but never took his eyes off the prized rookie, one of the most hyped imports in NHL history, as he disappeared into the other end.

A sea of fans inside the Pacific Coliseum began to rise, their roar cresting in anticipation as the Canucks winger whirred up the ice, leaving even his teammates in awe.

“The crowd was anticipating something,” McLean said. “Everybody was mesmerized. Most of the guys on the bench, as well, watching to see what would happen.”

His speed, McLean can still recall, was something to behold, almost unseen in the NHL at the time, and when paired with his inhuman agility seemed unfair to those he skated by. The result of the play, the kid’s first shift in the NHL, almost didn’t seem to matter. “He didn’t score, but certainly it showed what he was capable of doing at high speeds handling the puck,” McLean said. “Like a Connor McDavid does now.”

[coastal.view]

32 minutes ago, -AJ- said:

When Boeser began his rookie season, it became clear that he was on pace to challenge Bure as the best Canuck rookie of all-time. Still, he had to be consistent. And he was. He kept scoring and scoring. Unfortunately for many of us, Boeser suffered injuries just before he could catch Bure in the rookie records. Bure finished with 34 goals in 1991-92 to Boeser's 29 and Bure (and Hlinka) had 60 points to Boeser's 55. Bure wins this time.

 

But did he? Although Bure appears to top Boeser in most statistics for their rookie seasons, there are several factors to consider here. I made a table to lay some of them out (this is obviously not all that you can consider, but it's something):

 

 

I want to make it EXTREMELY CLEAR, that I am not comparing Bure later on in his career to 29-goal Boeser. This is NOT a comparison of 60- or 50-goal Bure to Boeser, but strictly a comparison of their rookie seasons. There's no question that Bure went on to a be a superstar in his heyday, and Boeser has yet to do that. The focus of this comparison is on their rookie campaigns.

 

In the end, I see that Boeser and Bure were very close in all their primary offensive statistics and taking that into account along with the difference in scoring for their respective eras, I'd personally put Boeser's rookie season ahead of Bure's. Still, there are other factors that don't show up as clearly on the stat sheet. How were they defensively? How much were they carried by their teammates? How much did they carry the team themselves and make things happen? Many of these questions are hard for me to answer, as I wasn't around back in 1991-92 to witness Bure's great rookie season. All that said, my vote still goes to Boeser's rookie season, but it's not by a long shot; Boeser's rookie year only barely edges out Bure's 1991-92 season in my estimation. We can only hope Boeser's sophomore year is as good as Bure's.

 

I brought this up briefly in the Boeser player thread a while back, but I wanted to see what the larger audience of CDC thought about it.

i have posted something similar before

comparable numbers do not at all tell the whole story

brock is a sniper and so he looks good statistically

he was largely ignored by other teams till around january 2018

he never took over games nor had other teams game plan to stop him all over the ice

 

bure was different and phenom

it was evident the first time he stepped on the ice

he was faster and more powerful then any other player

he was a bit raw but he scared the bejeebers out of other teams

they game planned against him almost immediately

he would embarrass other teams and other players

he took over games even in his first year

he was not just a sniper

he had many more components to his game

a much more complete and feared player

 

i would not trade a 1st year bure for a 1st year brock

but i'd trade a 1st year brock for a 1st year bure in a heart beat

i saw both play in their first years

the stats really are the only thing that they seem to compare quite well at

 

their 1st years are now done

i really like brock

brock could develop into a bossy

and have a better overall career then bure

if he reaches that level then we can compare the mature bure and the mature brock

 

[luckylager]

I voted Bure. 

The stats comparison is good to see and I'm really happy we have Brock. He has an amazing character and an elite shot.

 

Bure was a far more exciting though. More flash, a lot more dash. Yes, he was very selfish and not as hockey smart, but he was (for lack of a better word) electrifying. Jaw dropping skill

[bloodycanuckleheads]

Anyone who votes for Boeser is almost surely too young to remember Bure.  It isn't even close, Bure wins by a country mile. 

 

The Canucks were awful, and Bure almost singlehandedly turned us into a contender in his rookie year (a 31pt swing).  Boeser did no such thing (4pt swing).  We were still awful after adding him.  Bure was so good he changed our fortunes as a team.  From his first game, he was a superstar.  Boeser is good, but he's not quite a superstar.

[JM_]

Brock is a god send and a lot of fun to watch, and I'm taking nothing away for him, but Bure electrified the rink and changed things entirely here. 

[EdgarM]

The big difference is the entertainment factor. Both snipers, no doubt, but it was how Bure got the puck to the net is what made him so exciting. Its like he was on a mission every game and almost every shift to score a goal. The stats show when he produced but he made the game much more exciting even when he didn't score. I recall almost every game he had at least a couple of breakaways. Fun to watch for sure. He was kind of selfish in the beginning and his defense was not very good. Its like the only goal was to score , period. Boeser is a more all round player who knows his defensive responsibilities. A mature player like Bo.

Not as flashy as Bure but is similar in that they both knew how to get the puck behind the goalie when they were given the opportunity.

[Crabcakes]

Hard to compare Bure with Boeser because they were/are completely different players.

 

Bure was a game breaker who had a similar affect as McDavid but not at quite the same level.  Boeser is a pure sniper

 

For me, when I first saw Bure on TV I couldn't believe my eyes.  It was the best hockey day of my life because he jumped off the screen and was a bona fide super star unlike any Canuck to that point.  Ever for that matter.  He was the most exciting Canuck bar none

 

Boeser has the potential to be the best Canuck sniper ever.  That remains to be seen.  He's right up there with Naslund.  Time will tell if he's better

[189lb enforcers?]

Kids these days, hey? 

[189lb enforcers?]

39 minutes ago, EdgarM said:

The big difference is the entertainment factor. Both snipers, no doubt, but it was how Bure got the puck to the net is what made him so exciting. Its like he was on a mission every game and almost every shift to score a goal. The stats show when he produced but he made the game much more exciting even when he didn't score. I recall almost every game he had at least a couple of breakaways. Fun to watch for sure. He was kind of selfish in the beginning and his defense was not very good. Its like the only goal was to score , period. Boeser is a more all round player who knows his defensive responsibilities. A mature player like Bo.

Not as flashy as Bure but is similar in that they both knew how to get the puck behind the goalie when they were given the opportunity.

Pettersson looks to have some of this in him too. 

Lucky us.

If we end up drafting Boqvist, we might have a few elements resembling Bure’s Desire to score goals. 

[Chris12345]

10. Not even close. Just to be clear I think 6 is awesome but I bet 10 could still outskate 6.  

[Drakrami]

So what's the basis of this post other than to get your adrenaline high? Jeff Skinner also have similar numbers in his rookie season, is he a superstar that has rescued Carolina? Boeser is great and time will tell. 

[DADDYROCK]

Bure was the only Canuck (so far) to be a great scorer and had an edge to his game. When he was on the ice YOU COULD NOT HELP BUT NOTICE HIM,

SUPER SKILL AND SPEED.

A lot of players are fast but to take the puck with you when you go is really something to see and admire.The Sedins were all about position and not so much speed,they knew were each other were going to be ,classic Sedinary.

[10pavelbure96]

There will never be another Russian Rocket

[yes we can nucks]

5 minutes ago, 10pavelbure96 said:

There will never be another Russian Rocket

Yes, and there is only one Brocket!