Sign in to follow this  
-AJ-

Top 50 Canucks of All-Time - #18

Rate this topic

Top 50 Canucks of All-Time - #18  

59 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Kevin Biestra said:

Well, if this one's between Mogilny and Lumme, I gotta cheer for Lumme.  He is our all time career scoring leader for defensemen in the playoffs.  That's not far from the most important record you can have when it comes to greatness for a team.

 

But I really have to think about that one.  Shows how much things get bunched up in the 20s.

Absolutely...that said I think you have to still look to the guys that played around a decade ( Lidster/Lumme/Salo/Buthcer/Murzyns's) even though games played would suggest otherwise for Salo) and then weigh them against the Ronnings/Mogilny's/Jovo'/Adam's/Babych's/' etc of the team - sometimes the better player trumps games played - Bure is probably the best example of this.   This makes it hard right well into the 30's... I just hope that fans keep looking far enough into the past to give players their due from different era's and so far it hasn't been bad - that is until Tanev looks to be getting in much much sooner then he really should.  Who's next?  Horvat over Ronning?  Ughh.   Well at least Stetcher hasn't been nominated yet so there is that ha ha - or Maholtra or Sundin (the guy who made the Sedins like WTF is that all about) or Carter ..... I see your Carter and raise you Brown.   Its ok.  Still fun to talk about.   I did like how you separated your list into no particular order for 10-20-30-40 etc - really it will start to become razor thin after ten more of these - and many Canucks deserve the honour.   

  • Vintage 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
55 minutes ago, IBatch said:

Lidster was on some of the worst teams we've had unfortunately..like other defenseman - and a minus 35 is pretty grim over a full season...However Edler was a minus 39 in only 63 games in 2013-2014....and a minus magnet pretty much the entire rebuild (too be expected) in a lower scoring era.   Wonder how the "points adjusted" crowd would feel about toning down Lidster getting victimizing by the Oilers and Flames a bunch of times and ADDing to Edler's victimization to make it more equal....it would also make his record lower and easier for Hughes to break ha ha..

 

Yeah I just mostly ignore +/- for the 70s and 80s Canucks, unless there's a strong reason not to.  The goalies and defensemen were cannon fodder and the real measure of their contribution to the team was games and minutes played.  Guys like Lidster, Snepsts, Brodeur, Hanlon, Dunc Wilson, Cesare Maniago...they logged hard minutes.  None of that Mark Messier chill out and play pond hockey stuff.  In the 80s especially, it was just a murderers' row for 32 games a year against Gretzky, Dionne, Hawerchuk or the Flames.

 

Dennis Kearns, Don Lever and Garth Butcher are all well over (below) -100 for their Canucks career, but all I can really say is, duh, of course.  How could they not be?

 

The fact that Doug Lidster played 666 games for the Canucks, when they sucked the entire time, and Gretzky was in his division the entire time, and is actually better than -100 for his career is actually a strong testament to his play.

Edited by Kevin Biestra
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, IBatch said:

Absolutely...that said I think you have to still look to the guys that played around a decade ( Lidster/Lumme/Salo/Buthcer/Murzyns's) even though games played would suggest otherwise for Salo) and then weigh them against the Ronnings/Mogilny's/Jovo'/Adam's/Babych's/' etc of the team - sometimes the better player trumps games played - Bure is probably the best example of this.   This makes it hard right well into the 30's... I just hope that fans keep looking far enough into the past to give players their due from different era's and so far it hasn't been bad - that is until Tanev looks to be getting in much much sooner then he really should.  Who's next?  Horvat over Ronning?  Ughh.   Well at least Stetcher hasn't been nominated yet so there is that ha ha - or Maholtra or Sundin (the guy who made the Sedins like WTF is that all about) or Carter ..... I see your Carter and raise you Brown.   Its ok.  Still fun to talk about.   I did like how you separated your list into no particular order for 10-20-30-40 etc - really it will start to become razor thin after ten more of these - and many Canucks deserve the honour.   

 

Yeah, I've got Bure in the top ten based purely on peak performance and playoff success.  He lacks longevity, lacks commitment to the team, doesn't even like Vancouver.

 

Guys like Mogilny are lower down for me.  One fantastic season and then...meh.  That one season is so good that he vaults up into the top 40 for sure, and probably higher.  But I can't really call him "a great Canuck."  And I have Schneider currently just outside the top 50, and he had (by some measures) the two best regular seasons by a Canuck goalie in history.

 

I'll take slow and steady Snepsts and Burrows with ~800 games and a Stanley Cup final and playoff heroics over Mogilny etc. when it comes to being a "great Canuck."

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Kevin Biestra said:

 

Yeah I just mostly ignore +/- for the 70s and 80s Canucks, unless there's a strong reason not to.  The goalies and defensemen were cannon fodder and the real measure of their contribution to the team was games and minutes played.  Guys like Lidster, Snepsts, Brodeur, Hanlon, Dunc Wilson, Cesare Maniago...they logged hard minutes.  None of that Mark Messier chill out and play pond hockey stuff.  In the 80s especially, it was just a murderers' row for 32 games a year against Gretzky, Dionne, Hawerchuk or the Flames.

 

Dennis Kearns, Don Lever and Garth Butcher are all well over (below) -100 for their Canucks career, but all I can really say is, duh, of course.  How could they not be?

 

The fact that Doug Lidster played 666 games for the Canucks, when they sucked the entire time, and Gretzky was in his division the entire time, and is actually better than -100 for his career is actually a strong testament to his play.

All you have to do is look to see how he did on better teams and you can find out pretty quick that he was good in his own end too.    And late in his career too - on some so so NYR squads (the paid a heavy price to win a cup - that team was quickly dismantled after that - including hiim - but they brought him back after one year and did fine.  Did fine on the great Cancuck squads of the early nineties too.  Yeah those times were a lot different then post dead puck era...hockey was tougher and rougher.  Definitely hard minutes for every Canuck in the 80's....the high water mark for GPG might have been 81 - but it stretched out right until the 90's expansion came in and NJ won a cup - and the trap ensued...

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, IBatch said:

All you have to do is look to see how he did on better teams and you can find out pretty quick that he was good in his own end too.    And late in his career too - on some so so NYR squads (the paid a heavy price to win a cup - that team was quickly dismantled after that - including hiim - but they brought him back after one year and did fine.  Did fine on the great Cancuck squads of the early nineties too.  Yeah those times were a lot different then post dead puck era...hockey was tougher and rougher.  Definitely hard minutes for every Canuck in the 80's....the high water mark for GPG might have been 81 - but it stretched out right until the 90's expansion came in and NJ won a cup - and the trap ensued...

 

Lidster was like the best depth / utility defenseman in playoff history.  If a team grabbed the aging Lidster as the 6/7 guy...boom, they win the Cup.

 

His goal on McLean in the 94 Final was a beauty.

 

Edited by Kevin Biestra
  • Hydration 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Kevin Biestra said:

 

Yeah, I've got Bure in the top ten based purely on peak performance and playoff success.  He lacks longevity, lacks commitment to the team, doesn't even like Vancouver.

 

Guys like Mogilny are lower down for me.  One fantastic season and then...meh.  That one season is so good that he vaults up into the top 40 for sure, and probably higher.  But I can't really call him "a great Canuck."  And I have Schneider currently just outside the top 50, and he had (by some measures) the two best regular seasons by a Canuck goalie in history.

 

I'll take slow and steady Snepsts and Burrows with ~800 games and a Stanley Cup final and playoff heroics over Mogilny etc. when it comes to being a "great Canuck."

 

 

You'd be happy to know THN doesn't have him until the early 30's...around Hamhuis and Salo.   Right about where he should be when it comes to "great Canucks"...Of course if it came to pure skill then you'd have to move him right into a top five spot.  Arguably one or two really.   But then what would we do with Messier if we considered their entire careers....ugh.  Bure is the best player we've ever had and we had him long enough plus the playoff success with him to definitely given him his due.  I have him higher then anyone in the WCE era - behind the Sedins, Linden and Smyl.    THN has him 3 - too high IMO.. understand the break has a lot to do with management and Messier  - a lot of players went their own ways once Linden was stripped - it was a purposeful action given not everyone fell in line behind Messier.   At the time it actually cut deeply - loved Bure and couldn't believe he held out.   Keenan and Burke had some pretty good rifts and part of this was because Bure wasn't traded quick enough for his liking (Keenan).  

 

As a fun aside - for those who complained about TG pulling the goalie too early one game last season....Mike Keenan pulled the goalie mid-way in the third when we got a PP and we were down 3-1.  The PP was over and nobody scored.  Then a couple minutes later we got another PP and he did exactly the same.  Burke said to Nonis - don't freak out don't move a muscle all the camera's will be on us right now and don't give them anything (first time and second time)...of course they scored a short handed goal and the second time with the net empty - and just imagine free shots at an empty net with no icing!!!  After the game Burke came down and said "What the hell was that!!"  Keenan replied well get me some better players and then I won't have to do that again or something of the sort - then (love me some Burke) said " If you EVER do that again I will come down and beat the living sh!t out of you - take over the bench and coach the rest of the game - and then beat the living sh!t out of you again and fire your ass after the game"....

 

This was the close to the end of the end of Keenan...Burke was already upset because Keenan wanted to protect Peter freaking Zezel (who was good but not as good as he was) over fan favourite, much younger Scotty Walker in an expansion dratt....we lost Walker.    Keenan sucks for 50 reasons and these are two of them ha ha,

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, IBatch said:

This was the close to the end of the end of Keenan...Burke was already upset because Keenan wanted to protect Peter freaking Zezel (who was good but not as good as he was) over fan favourite, much younger Scotty Walker in an expansion dratt....we lost Walker.    Keenan sucks for 50 reasons and these are two of them ha ha,

 

Yeah, Zezel was a damn fine Flyer and Maple Leaf, but he was as done as Andrew McBain and Jimmy Carson when we got him.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Kevin Biestra said:

 

Yeah, Zezel was a damn fine Flyer and Maple Leaf, but he was as done as Andrew McBain and Jimmy Carson when we got him.

Yep... even then he wasn't terrible though - great on face-offs - the best part of having him was how cool his name was...same with Ciccone ha ha.  For some unfortunate reason I think I got off the island to watch too many of those games... Ciccone - another cool name and best thing about him - who wasn't what I thought he'd be given his time in TB and all the ice time he was getting there - with some guys saying he could be the next Tinordi (goon to learn to play well enough to become a very good defensive defenseman).  Good looking guy no doubt - but he wasn't the spaz he was in TB (which would have been A OK with those teams - at least nobody would beat us in the alley) and I was very disappointed (excited to get him until I watched him play - (slooowwww...and pretty bad really).   Zezel was built like a tank (5'10/11 220lbs) and a face off ace....but protecting him over Walker?  Terrible - wish Burke beat the sh!t out of him for that instead ha ha.  Scotty Walker went on to have a nice career - and one of the best light-weights in the league who could punch well above his weight class and do ok too (except one time against early in his career was destroyed by McCarty - who was a better player then fighter)...Walker became an all-time favorite NSH player - and managed another 11-12 years after he was picked up.   High water mark of 67 points on an expansion team...Had over 344PIMS in Syracuse in 94-95 and also played his first 11 games with us...at 5'9 and around 200lbs he was one tough SOB...wished we kept him - could have been a difference maker with our terrible middle six during the WCE years.  Walker Texas Ranger (Chuck Norris) was on around back then - sure NSH felt they had their own version of that character on their team ha ha.  Be fun to do top 50 "enforcers" all-time - he'd get in on my list - also would if it was "top fifty fan favorites".  So many mistakes were made back then - if we kept Peca and Walker - the top line and the middle six would have been in much better shape IMO.   Of course Messier was the biggest mistake.   Many forget he was coming off two great years - one with 50 goals and both over a PPG and close to full seasons.  Wow.  He came here and lobbed a hand grenade into the dressing room - then went and got some Lays and never had another great season despite the longevity.   The only silver lining was that at least the team got some assets - Bertuzzi, MCabe and Muckalt - and of course one Sedin for Linden.  And Morrison for Mogilny - which turned out OK but not great.  In Hindsight we'd have been better off keeping Peca of course...but there were many other not as big but still stupid things done like letting Walker walk.  He was a spark plug...imagine the wreckage him and Cooke would have done on the same line - and the hits Peca would have laid out (and how having a top Selke candidtate  Selanne is still dizzy from the one he did back in 1995 ha ha.  He went on to become " Captain Crunch" for the Sabres who made it to the final in 99, won two Selke's in 97 and 2002 and was a perrenial Selke candidate - part of the 2002 gold medal team - have some good seasons after Buffalo in NYI where I think he might have also Captained - and was also an important part of EDM Oilers cinderalla run to the final in 2006.  He also played the majority of his career in the dead puck era...Naslund Peca Bertuzzi would have been an even better line - with a better defensive conscious and Peca's stats would of had a boost given he never really played with top players other then Satan who was pretty good but never a top player like Naslund was for three years and a top power forward in three years of Bertuzzi.   Heck Moore would have never happened given he would have crunched him back the same game...a lot of things could have been different for sure.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Voting Morrison

 

Nominating Ronning

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, -AJ- said:

I would love it it others made their own top 50s. As I've alluded to, I've made a top 70 in preparation for this list (Top 65 originally, but I made some additions/changes). At the end of the list, I plan on comparing CDCs list with my own and noting out some similarities and differences.

Thats pretty cool.   Might post mine too - just to see how far off it is and what ended up pretty close or the same.  Top 50 is perfect given it's our 50th anniversary...although we haven't played 50 seasons yet and won't until the next one is done (lock-out screwed that up).   Like how Biestra made his list not in any particular order just in groups of tens.  Good way to pare it down and later shuffle the order from 1-10 11-20 etc.   So far the ones in and nominated are all deserving of top 50 on my list but it looks like it might change anytime - not sure where exactly Tanev should be if at all - but if he is definitely in the 45-50 range.  Of the current team only EP and Horvat should make it - maybe BB given his accolades and he's second fastest to 50 goals.  Tanev...well there is just too many other guys that were better and played long enough to consider him yet - or maybe at all.  Murzyn,Horvat, Kurtenbach,, EP,  Ververgaert, McCarthy , Hansen, Rota, Clouiter, Aucoin are in my 40-50 range and just outside looking are Lindgren, Mitchell and Cooke.  Which one of these guys would Tanev bump out?  Not to mention I don't have BB, Reinhardt or Hughes on my top 50 either.  Games played and all - only EP makes in with two or less seasons out of all the guys we've had over the years...Mitchell was a tough cut - he did play 264 games for us - and yes we probably would have won a cup if we kept him instead of trading a first for Ballard - and then later had to use one of our buyouts on him (over 4 million per season too).  Mitchell went on to play against us and win with LA ... not our brightest moment. 

Edited by IBatch
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, IBatch said:

Yep... even then he wasn't terrible though - great on face-offs - the best part of having him was how cool his name was...same with Ciccone ha ha.  For some unfortunate reason I think I got off the island to watch too many of those games... Ciccone - another cool name and best thing about him - who wasn't what I thought he'd be given his time in TB and all the ice time he was getting there - with some guys saying he could be the next Tinordi (goon to learn to play well enough to become a very good defensive defenseman).  Good looking guy no doubt - but he wasn't the spaz he was in TB (which would have been A OK with those teams - at least nobody would beat us in the alley) and I was very disappointed (excited to get him until I watched him play - (slooowwww...and pretty bad really).   Zezel was built like a tank (5'10/11 220lbs) and a face off ace....but protecting him over Walker?

 

Yeah I was a little surprised at how good Walker turned out to be.

 

As to Zezel, I guess every team does, but we sure had a lot of good players on their last legs when they were pretty much at the end of the line.  Mel Bridgman, Esa Tikkanen, Pit Martin, Gary Leeman, Jimmy Carson, Mike Ridley, Charlie Hodge, Randy Gregg, Mathieu Schneider, Andrew McBain, Dan Quinn, Eric Weinrich, Derek Roy, Marco Sturm...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Kevin Biestra said:

 

Yeah I was a little surprised at how good Walker turned out to be.

 

As to Zezel, I guess every team does, but we sure had a lot of good players on their last legs when they were pretty much at the end of the line.  Mel Bridgman, Esa Tikkanen, Pit Martin, Gary Leeman, Jimmy Carson, Mike Ridley, Charlie Hodge, Randy Gregg, Mathieu Schneider, Andrew McBain, Dan Quinn, Eric Weinrich, Derek Roy, Marco Sturm...

Add to that Back up Bob (was a Vezina finalist in WNP), Potvin (success in TO), Irbe (great at ruining Detroits possible runs in SJ despite on the cusp of greatness) and for a brief moment in time Beezer....

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Voted Mogilny

 

Nominating Cloutier.  I know lots of people only think of him for a couple of playoff reasons, but he held several Canuck goalie records until Luongo showed up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was torn between Lumme (probably should get it and, even now, has remained in the community and contributes so much) and Bieksa (one of my all time personal favs).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lidster. 
Though I don’t have him above Sundstrom. 

 

Sundstrom. 
How is he not on the ballot?

 

  • Hydration 1
  • Vintage 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

Lidster. 
Though I don’t have him above Sundstrom. 

 

Sundstrom. 
How is he not on the ballot?

 

My guess is that a lot of people have forgotten Sundstrom.  How was he received at the time?  Do you know?  I looked up his 91 point season and I see that he was still outside the top 20 in NHL scoring.  I'm wondering if his accomplishments were overshadowed by the superstars of the 80's.  Even on the Canucks we had guys like Smyl, Tanti and Gradin.  Did they maybe overshadow him to a degree as well?  

 

I am legitimately asking as I wasn't around at the time and don't know. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

Lidster. 
Though I don’t have him above Sundstrom. 

 

Sundstrom. 
How is he not on the ballot?

 

I voted Lidster first - then changed my vote later to Lumme because I have them both around the same back to back and trying to block Mogilny for at least one more spot .... ugh.  Maybe if the Boudrais votes and few others that see the value in the old timers join forces we can get this done.  Sundstrom should be in for sure  .... hopefully he gets in soon.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, goalie13 said:

Voted Mogilny

 

Nominating Cloutier.  I know lots of people only think of him for a couple of playoff reasons, but he held several Canuck goalie records until Luongo showed up.

Not the important ones like games won, single season or overall, team MVP, all-star selections, Vezina finalist selections - all-star games or second team all-star selections or playoff SP (McLean had .928 in 94) ...a tad early but I also have him in the top fifty - near the end.  He's probably our fourth best goalie but some would have Smith higher.   Playoff gaffs don't help his legacy - that said despite his failings he was a number one goalie at the time - and did have seven shut-outs for us one year.  And if needed we also had one more puncher in the line-up which was pretty cool.  Have him in the top fifty too - but not for a while yet.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.