The difference between the Canucks and Stanley Cup winners

[Dumb Nuck]

2 hours ago, coastal.view said:

the nucks in 2011

had a lot of breaks go their way

 

they got to slay the dragon

 

kesler carried them against nashville

 

that bieksa goal against the sharks

 

even against boston, luongo got a couple of shut outs at home

 

maybe they did not get every break that might have helped

but they got a few

and getting past the hawks was extremely fortunate

We were the best team in the league by far, Chicago finished 8th in the conference, it never should have gone 7. We weren’t then as we aren’t now, tough enough for the playoffs.

[Nucker 67]

Canucks were good enough to win in 2011, but the poor reffing and injuries made it difficult. It can depend on matchups leading to the SCF as well. The Canucks had a tough road that year.  

 

BOS - beating MTL, PHI, TB

VAN - beating CHI, NSH, SJ

 

I don`t think they`re too far from being a contending team again. I would prefer a better, more experienced coach. I`d also like Horvat to step up to another level and stand out as the leader. I think they should replace Baumgartner with a better D coach (Mitchell?). Maybe it`s just a matter of time, the stars on this team (Pettersson, Hughes, Boeser) are all still really young. Virtanen, Gaudette, MacEwen and Demko are also quite young. They need a little more experience and confidence. Hoping for playoffs to see what they`ve got, but next year should be a great team.

[Duodenum]

Still think we would've won in 2011 if not for the team being decimated by injuries. 

 

We had it the best team in the league that year and should've won the cup but the injury list was too long to overcome.

 

Kesler, Ehrhoff, Rome (suspended), Samuelsson, Malhotra, Higgins, Hamhuis...Edler/Raymond/Alberts injured in game 6. 

 

2 top 4 dmen + a 3rd in game 6. 2 top 6 forwards and a 3rd in game 6. 2 important bottom six guys playing hurt. 

 

All that and still took it to game 7. 

 

 

[erkayloomeh]

11 hours ago, Duodenum said:

Still think we would've won in 2011 if not for the team being decimated by injuries. 

 

We had it the best team in the league that year and should've won the cup but the injury list was too long to overcome.

 

Kesler, Ehrhoff, Rome (suspended), Samuelsson, Malhotra, Higgins, Hamhuis...Edler/Raymond/Alberts injured in game 6. 

 

2 top 4 dmen + a 3rd in game 6. 2 top 6 forwards and a 3rd in game 6. 2 important bottom six guys playing hurt. 

 

All that and still took it to game 7. 

 

 

And. If we were mentally tough enough to take out Chicago in 4 instead of playing those extra 3 games we would have been more rested and healthy. 

If not for that we would have won the cup despite reffs and Luongo being fairly inferior to Thomas .

 

[EdgarM]

11 hours ago, Duodenum said:

Still think we would've won in 2011 if not for the team being decimated by injuries. 

 

We had it the best team in the league that year and should've won the cup but the injury list was too long to overcome.

 

Kesler, Ehrhoff, Rome (suspended), Samuelsson, Malhotra, Higgins, Hamhuis...Edler/Raymond/Alberts injured in game 6. 

 

2 top 4 dmen + a 3rd in game 6. 2 top 6 forwards and a 3rd in game 6. 2 important bottom six guys playing hurt. 

 

All that and still took it to game 7. 

 

 

Yeah we were shaky throughout the entire playoffs. From the total domination we displayed in the regular season I did not see one obstacle we were going to have to battle over in the playoffs. Our PP was almost a gimme most nights and in the playoffs we struggled, especially in the finals. The Sedins were taken aback by the tight checking and aggressive play in the playoffs and Luongo had some less then steller performances. We needed these guys to "Up" their games and that never happened.

When we really needed that "One" save or that "One" goal, our leaders could not pull it off.

Miller? or Petey? or Marky in the same position? I like our chances the next time around.

[Heretic]

Difference between the Canucks and Stanley Cup Winners?

 

Stanley Cup Winners have won the cup - the Canucks haven't.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Kevin Biestra]

18 hours ago, whcanuck said:

Since we all have a lot of free time with the NHL season being suspended, I’ve been watching a lot of old NHL highlights.

 

The 2009-2015 Chicago Blackhawks really fascinate me. Sure I, like I’m sure most of you, loathed them at the time since they tore the hearts out of the Canucks collective chests more than once, but still, their resolve and mettle during these years was absolutely incredible. Whenever they needed a huge play, a goal, a save, anything, they got it 99 times out of 100. 
 

I don’t think their teams in 2009 or 2010 were any better than ours, but they always got that extra something, EXACTLY when they needed it. In 2011 when the Canucks had those opportunities, they failed to make them count. 
 

Chicago was absolutely incredible at finding ways to win, even in the most impossible circumstances. They were down 4-3 in game 5 of their Nashville series in 2010 and short handed on a 5 minute major. They score the tying goal with 13 seconds left, short handed! Then the guy who took the penalty, Marian Hossa, scores the winner in OT!! How in the world is that possible???

 

The Canucks more often than not, find a way to give up that crucial goal, or can’t get that critical save. It’s all about timing, confidence and belief. I really think the Canucks would have at least one Stanley Cup title by now if we had that mental strength that champions have. Even in 2011, I don’t think they truly believed they’d win the Stanley Cup. It’s likely because we haven’t had that excellent coach basically since Pat Quinn. Some pretty good ones, but not one who could get these guys to believe in themselves enough to get that Cup.

 

Sorry about the novel, what do you guys think?

 

Pretty much agree.  The only Canuck team I've seen that fit the bill was the 1994 version.  It was a photofinish for the Cup and the Canucks only lost because both teams couldn't win.

 

The 1982 team had every element except the skill to match the Islanders.  It was like Chuck Wepner and Muhammad Ali.  They had the will and and the heart but were just too overmatched.

 

The 2011 team...  The opposite.  Had the skill and were missing something mentally.  As was the case with 2009 and 2010 and 2012.

 

I have nothing but respect for Henrik but Smyl and Linden provided a much more Toews-like brand of leadership.

 

Also, Richard Brodeur and Kirk McLean were much more even keeled in the net.  Luongo has amazing highs as a goalie but also very low valleys.

Edited March 16, 2020 by Kevin Biestra

[RowdyCanuck]

Posters have brought up 2011 and like now we lack toughness.....you need a roster full of gamers and push back if you want to win a cup, look at the blues last season......

 

if the Canucks want a cup then bring in real toughness not pests.....

that 2011 team had no answer for chara or the rat......we didn't have enough toughness to shelter the Sedins......

 

i for one believe in the hockey gods and from the years I've watched and played the gods repay those that will leave it all on the ice and they repay those that spill the other teams blood the most.....look at the Bronx bullies or blues or the list goes on......

 

also thats why I want Josh Manson or Shea Weber or someone like them.....

look at the Hawks......Keith needed seabrook and they balanced each other.......we have a Rich mans Keith in Hughes but Tanev is way to soft....

Hughes Manson 

Edler Myers 

would be the perfect top four and with good balance.....

 

also the 2011 run felt more like a Cinderella run and not a run cause we were the best regular season team......

 

[falcon45ca]

18 hours ago, whcanuck said:

In the regular season yeah, but I remember numerous breakdowns in the Chicago series, and getting absolutely annihilated in 4 of the 7 games against Boston 

The injury to Hamhuis took the shut-down out of the Canucks D against Boston

[EdgarM]

2 hours ago, falcon45ca said:

The injury to Hamhuis took the shut-down out of the Canucks D against Boston

One guy does not make a team. Also , I remember in the 94 run that it was a total team effort as to why they were so successful. Reffing was brutal back then too but it didn't seem to affect the team, they just kept trudging along. Bure had enough of his assault from Dallas and let Churla know about it personally.

[RowdyCanuck]

2 minutes ago, EdgarM said:

One guy does not make a team. Also , I remember in the 94 run that it was a total team effort as to why they were so successful. Reffing was brutal back then too but it didn't seem to affect the team, they just kept trudging along. Bure had enough of his assault from Dallas and let Churla know about it personally.

I wish we had bure and linden instead of the Sedins on that 2011 team....

picturing bure taking care of chara with an elbow , would have made that finals not so disappointing ha

[EdgarM]

2 hours ago, RowdyCanuck said:

Posters have brought up 2011 and like now we lack toughness.....you need a roster full of gamers and push back if you want to win a cup, look at the blues last season......

 

if the Canucks want a cup then bring in real toughness not pests.....

that 2011 team had no answer for chara or the rat......we didn't have enough toughness to shelter the Sedins......

 

i for one believe in the hockey gods and from the years I've watched and played the gods repay those that will leave it all on the ice and they repay those that spill the other teams blood the most.....look at the Bronx bullies or blues or the list goes on......

 

also thats why I want Josh Manson or Shea Weber or someone like them.....

look at the Hawks......Keith needed seabrook and they balanced each other.......we have a Rich mans Keith in Hughes but Tanev is way to soft....

Hughes Manson 

Edler Myers 

would be the perfect top four and with good balance.....

 

also the 2011 run felt more like a Cinderella run and not a run cause we were the best regular season team......

 

This is so true, we had to fight and claw all the way to the final and I thought the Sedins were our "Ace in the hole" and were going to make it a "cake walk". I was so waiting for some "Heroic" action being taken in any of the games in the finals and at least expected something in the game 7. Nothing ever happened and the rest is history.

[RowdyCanuck]

1 minute ago, EdgarM said:

This is so true, we had to fight and claw all the way to the final and I thought the Sedins were our "Ace in the hole" and were going to make it a "cake walk". I was so waiting for some "Heroic" action being taken in any of the games in the finals and at least expected something in the game 7. Nothing ever happened and the rest is history.

Well they played that way their whole career , it wasn't until the rule changes came in , that they became star players , only problem with that is the Sedins have never been great players when the reffs don't protect them.....

I remember after losing to the Kings the following year wanting the Sedins gone and let guys like kesler and juice lead the news guys......

like another poster mentioned juice had big moments and so did kesler but the Sedins never did..... Unless it was during regular season or a shift.....

[EdgarM]

2 minutes ago, RowdyCanuck said:

Well they played that way their whole career , it wasn't until the rule changes came in , that they became star players , only problem with that is the Sedins have never been great players when the reffs don't protect them.....

I remember after losing to the Kings the following year wanting the Sedins gone and let guys like kesler and juice lead the news guys......

like another poster mentioned juice had big moments and so did kesler but the Sedins never did..... Unless it was during regular season or a shift.....

Yes I remember the "Character" guys on the team and Kess was one of my favorites. I think he had the potential to lead, as well as Bieksa, if they weren't being lead by the Sedins. Imagine if Jovo or Ohlund lead the team instead of Nazzy?

I thought the decision to name a new Captain was way too premature and we would have been better off to wait until we saw what we had. I hope Bo develops into his own but right now he is direct clone of Hank.

We have a lot of "Character" guys on the team I am hoping our Leadership become "Character" guys as well.

[RowdyCanuck]

2 minutes ago, EdgarM said:

Yes I remember the "Character" guys on the team and Kess was one of my favorites. I think he had the potential to lead, as well as Bieksa, if they weren't being lead by the Sedins. Imagine if Jovo or Ohlund lead the team instead of Nazzy?

I thought the decision to name a new Captain was way too premature and we would have been better off to wait until we saw what we had. I hope Bo develops into his own but right now he is direct clone of Hank.

We have a lot of "Character" guys on the team I am hoping our Leadership become "Character" guys as well.

I didn't mind Nazzy cause Bert was there to make up for nazzy's lack of toughness but I agree with yea.....

I think petey should be captain once his ready cause his already showed push back...so has Hughes....

Or Miller cause he reminds me of iggy. 

I agree Bo is turning into a clone of hank and funny thing is since we made nice guys our captain , we have a problem beating weaker teams and we lack that killer instinct....

i think we will be like the Kings , they took Browns C away and gave it to kopitar.....I see us doing the same thing with bo and petey......

[EdgarM]

6 minutes ago, RowdyCanuck said:

I didn't mind Nazzy cause Bert was there to make up for nazzy's lack of toughness but I agree with yea.....

I think petey should be captain once his ready cause his already showed push back...so has Hughes....

Or Miller cause he reminds me of iggy. 

I agree Bo is turning into a clone of hank and funny thing is since we made nice guys our captain , we have a problem beating weaker teams and we lack that killer instinct....

i think we will be like the Kings , they took Browns C away and gave it to kopitar.....I see us doing the same thing with bo and petey......

I still have hope for Bo, he started out great and did seem to have a bit of aggression in his game, but so did Jake, Roussel, Edler and Beagle at one time. It seems their games have changed for some reason. That's why I was hoping for playoffs this year to see who showed characteristics that would lead us to a Championship, who had the ability to "Up" their game when it counts.

[Kevin Biestra]

13 minutes ago, RowdyCanuck said:

I didn't mind Nazzy cause Bert was there to make up for nazzy's lack of toughness but I agree with yea.....

I think petey should be captain once his ready cause his already showed push back...so has Hughes....

Or Miller cause he reminds me of iggy. 

I agree Bo is turning into a clone of hank and funny thing is since we made nice guys our captain , we have a problem beating weaker teams and we lack that killer instinct....

i think we will be like the Kings , they took Browns C away and gave it to kopitar.....I see us doing the same thing with bo and petey......

I don't particularly care for Brown, but the Kings took away his C after he captained them to two Cups and now the Kings are bottom feeders.

[wallstreetamigo]

22 hours ago, Chris12345 said:

Game changers....I can only think of one. And I mean real game changers.

 

Like : "boys we aren't $%&$ing losing" game changers and I'm good enough to make it happen.

 

Some players have shown it from time to time. Kes, Hank, Danny, Trevor.

 

 

I honestly feel like JT Miller will be that guy for this team.

[falcon45ca]

1 hour ago, RowdyCanuck said:

I wish we had bure and linden instead of the Sedins on that 2011 team....

picturing bure taking care of chara with an elbow , would have made that finals not so disappointing ha

No way Bure could reach that high

[oldnews]

1 hour ago, EdgarM said:

One guy does not make a team.

It wasn't one guy - reality betrays your point / or rather your point would better substantiate the reality of the depth of losses to the TEAM, not merely an individual - as it's not that simple - ran far deeper than one player.

 

Hamhuis - obviously - arguably their #1 D - was out.

Samuelsson - a top 6 - was out.

Chris Higgins - had a broken foot = had surgery.  key middle six two way forward.

Erhoff - has a serious shoulder injury - had surgery.  Top 4/ second pairing D.

Kesler - had groin and hip labrum tears.  2C

Mason Raymond - had a broken back.  Top 6 / 2nd line LW

Alex Edler - had two broken fingers.  Top 4 / #2 D

Salo - had a groin injury - another 20 minute D.

Rome was suspended - abd Andrew Alberts left game 6, injured (unspecified).  2 replacement D, in addition to the 4 D already named.

 

So yes - it's a team game - and while every team faces injuries, each of them also has a breaking point.

The volume and quality of that list - would break virtually any team - particularly when your opponent - is also an elite, deep, two way, balanced team - with quality and depth at every position.