[Article] Elliotte Friedman: “WE KNEW WE HAD SOMETHING” This is the story of how the greatest team in Vancouver Canucks history was built. In the words of the people who were there.

[Where's Wellwood]

Quote

The last Canadian team to come close to the Stanley Cup was the 2010–11 Vancouver Canucks. I wasn’t around that team on a daily basis, but loved my interactions with them. They were talented, bold and brash, with personality up and down the roster. After a dominant regular season and the most emotional victory in franchise history, they fell one win shy of the ultimate prize.

Where does their story start? The drafting of Daniel and Henrik Sedin? The growth of Kevin Bieksa, Alex Burrows and Ryan Kesler? The trade for Roberto Luongo? Maybe the answer is “D” — none of the above. The nucleus grew from the ashes of the West Coast Express Canucks that, in 2003, won the franchise’s first playoff series in eight seasons. One year later, Vancouver became the first team to prevent the Avalanche from winning a division title since they’d moved from Quebec City. But the Canucks missed the playoffs the year after the 2004–05 lockout, ending the momentum.

The 2006–07 season marked the beginning of a new era for the franchise. And from Todd Bertuzzi to Brendan Morrison to Mattias Ohlund, the nuts and bolts of the previous one shared what they could before moving on.

MIKE BURNSTEIN (Athletic trainer, 1994–2015) That first group certainly helped build that second group.

MASON RAYMOND (LW, 2007–2013) Those guys shaped and molded that team and were very welcoming, even though they maybe felt their time was coming to an end. It wasn’t a dog-eat-dog world. It was a very much a let’s try to pull on the rope in the same direction, you help me and I can help you kind of deal.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TC CARLING (VP, communications & community partnerships, 1999–2013; VP, hockey administration, 2014–2018) That gave [the Sedins] some time to find their way. The brothers were then, what, six [or] seven years post-draft? Even if it was a slow passing of the baton, it really became their team. They were the best players.

DANIEL SEDIN (LW, 2000–2018; future Hall of Famer) We never looked at ourselves — so I’m talking for myself and Henrik — as great players. We always looked at the West Coast Express as being dominant, and we didn’t see ourselves in that same category. But they prepared us for how it would be.

ERIC CRAWFORD (Video coach, AHL assistant coach and executive, 1999–2015) I lived it all. I was there from Brian Burke to Jim Benning, so I saw the full arc of that group. Starting with Burkie drafting the Sedins, then that West Coast Express grow and become exciting and get hockey back in Vancouver. The fanbase there became disillusioned after being really close in 1994 with the [Kirk] McLean, [Trevor] Linden group and [Pavel] Bure. But when we were building that 2011 team, starting from Burke, transitioning to Dave Nonis, and then onto Mike Gillis, the one thing I will say about Nonis is that Dave was steadfast in his belief that this team was going to be built under Daniel and Henrik. They were going to be the leaders of the group.

 

https://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/best-vancouver-canucks-team-history-part/

 

 

 

It's a really long article made up of quotes by different guys so I don't want to quote it all here but 

 

Chapter 1: The Sedins

Chapter 2: Bieksa, Kesler, Burrows

Chapter 3: Luongo

Chapter 4: Vigneault

Chapter 5: Gillis

these quotes stood out to me from this chapter.

Quote

GILLIS My first free agency, we’re trying to sign Michael Ryder. We felt we were getting played by the agent — you know, we were new. The money kept going up. I said to everybody, “Okay, here’s your chance. Speak up. Do we want this guy or not?” Michael Ryder was a right-handed shot who could score, right? We’re constantly thinking about how to get the twins from 70 points to 100 points. (But the response ) was kind of… mixed. I listened to everybody and said, “Okay, we’re out. We’re not getting this guy. Let’s move on.” We wanted people to speak up.… What I didn’t want was people after the fact saying, “Oh, I disagreed with that.” What I wanted was, you’ve come to a consensus, it was highly collaborative, and once the decision was made, everyone was behind that and we moved on…. I could tell when it was more about the money than it was about the environment. We wanted people that were committed to being the best they could possibly be and committed to looking at new ways of becoming that player. And if we didn’t see it, we didn’t want them. I felt very strongly that we could create an environment that would attract younger free agents that were accomplished players to Vancouver if we made certain changes.

Quote

EHRHOFF At the highest level, it’s that little percentage. You can’t be 100 per cent better than your opponent, but you can be one per cent better in a hundred ways.

Chapter 6: Putting it all together: The road to 2011

 

https://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/best-vancouver-canucks-team-history-part/

 

Friedman will put out Part 2 on April 22.

Edited April 19, 2020 by Where's Wellwood

[I.Am.Ironman]

That team was absolutely dominant. A pleasure to watch. At the end of the day we fought injuries, refs, and inconsistent goaltending. Those, along with AVs mis management of the goaltending situation in the finals was why we lost... imo. Pull Lu in game 3, start Schneids in game 4 then who knows.

[CRAZY_4_NAZZY]

Great to be brought back into nostalgia during some really slow days as of late.

 

Elliotte seems to have a real soft spot for Vancouver.  Other than the Leafs coverage, he seems to really have an inside track on Canuck news and focus on this team.  Kinda feels nice that an Eastern based reporter showing a lot of interest and paying homage to some important history for this franchise.

[-AJ-]

I think the further away I get from the 2011 team, the more I realize how insanely dominant it was. To have the feeling going into literally every single game that you will very likely come out the victors is an insane feeling, but it was the honest truth. It didn't matter if we were going against the #2 team in the NHL, we were the favourites and as a fan, I was always confident we had a very good chance of winning.

[Maniwaki Canuck]

10 minutes ago, CRAZY_4_NAZZY said:

Great to be brought back into nostalgia during some really slow days as of late.

 

Elliotte seems to have a real soft spot for Vancouver.  Other than the Leafs coverage, he seems to really have an inside track on Canuck news and focus on this team.  Kinda feels nice that an Eastern based reporter showing a lot of interest and paying homage to some important history for this franchise.

Absolutely:  a really nice change from the usual Tranna commentary on our team.  What I liked most was the breakdown of what made that team tick:  very accurate imho.

[-DLC-]

I saw more games live in 2011 than ever before and, in hindsight, it will remain one of the best sports experiences ever for me.  We got the "on the ice"/behind the scenes edition and I felt so connected to that team.  They were absolutely brilliant and, beyond their skill, had a lot of fun together which seemed to create a relaxed/comfortable atmosphere until the game faces were on.

 

Having players stick together from day one is something kind of special and I will always really love the Juice-Burr-Kes deal as part of that.

 

Sedins, Lu were phenomenal assets to have as well.  Etc.

 

Players that came/went all seemed to be perfectly timed.  So close...I never think of that team as a "failure" as they're too often labeled.  One game that got away...and it happens.  Doesn't discount what they did do together or how dominant they were.  Something really special there.

[smithers joe]

gives you an insight not only how that team was built but also, how this team is being built and how much more the building will take. 

benji is on the right track but might be set back because of a flat cap. i see some similarities between miller and kesler; toff and burrows; petey and boes with the sedins. rous and ferland were suppose to add to our toughness but both were sidelined by injuries. marky has started to take over what lou gave us. 

finally they found someone to play with bo and if toff is resigned we will have 6 top 6 players in a few years. 

we still need our d to play better. we still need a juice. 

Edited April 19, 2020 by smithers joe

[morgo]

1 minute ago, debluvscanucks said:

One game that got away...and it happens.  Doesn't discount what they did do.

One game?  The team all but gave-up 3 times when all they had to do was win 2 of 5.  Yes the league allowed Boston to get away with murder and injuries to the blueline were a factor but still...  You're a win away from a 3-0 stranglehold on the cup and you lose EIGHT to one...  That was the series right there. 

[-AJ-]

18 minutes ago, morgo said:

One game?  The team all but gave-up 3 times when all they had to do was win 2 of 5.  Yes the league allowed Boston to get away with murder and injuries to the blueline were a factor but still...  You're a win away from a 3-0 stranglehold on the cup and you lose EIGHT to one...  That was the series right there. 

It's been 9 years. Time to move on appreciate the positives instead of still hanging on to the negative feelings.

[-DLC-]

32 minutes ago, morgo said:

One game?  The team all but gave-up 3 times when all they had to do was win 2 of 5.  Yes the league allowed Boston to get away with murder and injuries to the blueline were a factor but still...  You're a win away from a 3-0 stranglehold on the cup and you lose EIGHT to one...  That was the series right there. 

They played a game 7.  THAT game.  And if you're still stuck on "they blew it", you're not enjoying hockey like you should in my mind.  There were some GREAT takeaways and if the focus is "choked" then it's tunnel vision and bitterness that should be long behind us.

 

"All they had to do".  That's what guys watching at home say but, unfortunately, it's a really difficult task IRL.  "All but gave up" just demonstrates even further that you don't appreciate how hard it is to do this - to end a season with a gruelling 7 game series.  Takes a toll.  They gave it all they had and anyone questioning that is suspect to me.

 

The ride to get there was sure fun as a fan.  Just like the '94 run, all I have now are fond memories even though we did lose.  The playoffs are so exciting and to be part of that as a fan/city is something special.

[Brad Marchand]

1 hour ago, -AJ- said:

I think the further away I get from the 2011 team, the more I realize how insanely dominant it was. To have the feeling going into literally every single game that you will very likely come out the victors is an insane feeling, but it was the honest truth. It didn't matter if we were going against the #2 team in the NHL, we were the favourites and as a fan, I was always confident we had a very good chance of winning.

Still the most recent team to lead the NHL in both goals for and goals against. If not for a lousy two games against the Oilers when they'd already clinched the Presidents' Trophy, they very likely would have also finished with the league's best powerplay and penalty kill (they ended up 1st in PP% and 3rd in PK%).

 

That year, the Canucks won the following awards, either individually or as a team:
Presidents' Trophy

Art Ross Trophy
Ted Lindsay Award

Frank J. Selke Trophy

William M. Jennings Trophy
Clarence Campbell Bowl

NHL General Manager of the Year Award

 

They also had finalists for the Hart Trophy, Vezina Trophy, and Jack Adams Award. Falling just short of the Cup probably left people to underappreciate just how much that team accomplished that year.

[Coconuts]

Best Canuck read I've done in a while, just sat there and read it all

 

I know the 94 team has a special place in the hearts of many, but in my eyes that 2010-2011 team was the best one we ever had

 

It's a magical thing to wake up gameday for two years fully expecting your team to win every single time, and not having it be because you're a homer

 

Thanks for posting 

Edited April 19, 2020 by Coconuts

[chon derry]

The 2011 run was great. watching the 'core' of that team grow over time was captivating similar to the current core . unfortunately the similarity from  2011 to the 94 run was neither team was able to get back the following season.  which brings me to this current team 'core' . this current core is doing things at an early stage that the 2011 core  wasn't doing.  that said I think this current core when it gets to a deep PO run  I beleave its young enough to have the ability to return the following season. I find this current core more exciting than 94  or 2011. also I found the 94 run more exciting than the 2011. these are close margins  being the diehard nux fan that I am!  

Edited April 19, 2020 by chon derry

[Darkstar]

One thing I loved about the 2011 team was how fluid they were. You could see by watching them that they acted as one unit, and you could expect any one of the four lines to contribute at any given time. The mobility of the defensive core was excellent, and Luongo held his own for much of the season. Even though they won the Presidents Trophy in 2012, the team just didn't look the same. Those were some amazing years, and I can't believe it's been a decade since the 2010 Olympics and 2011 Cup Finals. 

[CRAZY_4_NAZZY]

 

BURNSTEIN We had a core group of guys from a fitness level that really kind of took it on. It did become contagious.

 

 

 

“I’m going to beat Henrik, Henrik wants to beat Kes, Kes wants to beat Burr. I feel that translated into our games. We came at teams in waves.”

 

 

This quote stuck out to me a lot and makes me look at our group and wonder if that high level of compete is starting to become part of the DNA of our group.  

 

Not only do we want to beat the opposition but that internal fire and competition to be better than the next player beside you even if that's your teammate.  Reflect a lot how closely knitted that 2011 group was.  Hope that this culture becomes replicated and expanded upon with our current group.

 

 

[Trebreh]

hfboards had a poll on which non Cup winning team is the best in the past decade or something, and the 2011 Canuck team didn't get much love... as expected since its hfboards afterall.

 

but imo, that 2011 team was (if not) the most dominant team in the cap era. we had grit, size, skill, 1a 1b goaltending tandem, depth you name it that team had it. 

 

i remember watching games where we would be down 2-3 in the 3rd and i always felt we could come back (and they did most times) and get a point out of it. 

 

a healthy 2011 team was unstoppable, the Ruins needed 7 games and the refs to beat a shell of our team in the finals!! 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[smithers joe]

1 hour ago, Brad Marchand said:

Still the most recent team to lead the NHL in both goals for and goals against. If not for a lousy two games against the Oilers when they'd already clinched the Presidents' Trophy, they very likely would have also finished with the league's best powerplay and penalty kill (they ended up 1st in PP% and 3rd in PK%).

 

That year, the Canucks won the following awards, either individually or as a team:
Presidents' Trophy

Art Ross Trophy
Ted Lindsay Award

Frank J. Selke Trophy

William M. Jennings Trophy
Clarence Campbell Bowl

NHL General Manager of the Year Award

 

They also had finalists for the Hart Trophy, Vezina Trophy, and Jack Adams Award. Falling just short of the Cup probably left people to underappreciate just how much that team accomplished that year.

still, some fans on here cried the team were losers and it was a lost season. how can anyone write that team off as losers? i think they were talking about themselves.

[Slegr]

As dominant as that team was, it just fills with me disappointment thinking back to those finals.

In the semi-finals, Boston and Tampa went to Game 7, OT I think. Zero penalties / power plays too I believe. The NHL did its best go get Boston in the finals. Had it been the Lightning that we faced, we would have won it all in 5 games.

[alt kilgore]

It will be great one day, hopefully, to not have to immortalize and fawn over our SCF losses.  And instead re-live the glory of one, (or more!) Stanley Cups!  

I wonder if Buffalo fans revere and glorify their '75 and '99 SCF losses as much as we do with our losses?

 

(I was going to mention St. Louis, and their fans, and how much they ever idolized their own previous SCF appearances before last season, but a very odd history with them I found out or forgot about.  Their only other SCF appearances other than last season were in their very first 3 seasons back to back to back. '67 - '70.  In all of them they were swept. By Canadiens twice, and then Boston. Now THAT must have sucked then of course, but also in the years/decades that followed.)

[Coconuts]

41 minutes ago, Slegr said:

As dominant as that team was, it just fills with me disappointment thinking back to those finals.

In the semi-finals, Boston and Tampa went to Game 7, OT I think. Zero penalties / power plays too I believe. The NHL did its best go get Boston in the finals. Had it been the Lightning that we faced, we would have won it all in 5 games.

I remember tracking that game seven and losing my $&!# over Boston's getting away with everything. Not a single powerplay for Tampa as I recall, which is nuts when you consider how much talent was on that Tampa team.