[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.

[Squamfan]

1 hour ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

Hate? 
 



Mirror images, IMO. 

 

 

All part of the same entertainment industry, I guess... 

 

Bullies and Victims. 
 

In sports though, I’d rather be the hammer than the nail, same goes for the teams I support and want to win. 
 

.......

 

As for the article, and in general, as far as the 2011 season went, I enjoyed the ride, but was not surprised they lost in the playoffs. They heavily relied on the PP to get results, which, duh, doesn’t translate into the playoffs where there are few penalties. It was the way they lost the series that still bothers me, which is different than what I think about the other Finals the Canucks lost in. (Linden with broken ribs and scoring goals was a high bar to match though) 

 

The 2011 season was the season after that awful rash of deaths relating to mental illness in the summer of 2010. That set the stage for a lot of the experience for many fans of the sport. I watched the Canucks in the Finals without people who went the same way. Strange days. 
 

The Sedin Twin ESP thing was really something, especially during those seasons. 
 

Strangely enough, I like our current roster’s chances better in the playoffs than I did that team. 

 

1 hour ago, Kevin Biestra said:

 

Sigh...  Reminds me of Biff and George McFly for the first 95% of Back to the Future.  George finally realized what needed to be done...

 

And that POS Kelly Sutherland gave Daniel a misconduct for that. There a reason why @King Heffyhates June so much

[Baratheon]

Man you guys are killing me with this thread.  Reminding me of all the things that irritated me most.  The Sedins should not be blamed for that series.  They absolutely played correctly.  That clip that people play of Daniel getting punched is called drawing a penalty.  Vancouver actually did a good job of getting under the Bruins skin.  The idea is that the Bruins will then start to be undisciplined and that's exactly what happened.  The refs just happened to let them get away with it rather than do their jobs.  

 

I am a boxing guy!  Throwing hands is kind of my jam.  So it's weird for me to find myself on the opposite side of the "toughness" crowd.  I have just never seen the criticisms of the 2011 team presented in a compelling enough way that I believe it.  We got screwed guys.  It's as simple as that.  If anyone needs to do a better job of standing up for the team it's us fans and not the players. 

[theo5789]

To go on a completely different trend from this thread so far. Interesting that we had targeted Ryder. Didn't remember him being on that Boston team that beat us.

 

I always find it interesting on what deals could've been made or potential players of target.

[knucklehead91]

8 hours ago, theo5789 said:

To go on a completely different trend from this thread so far. Interesting that we had targeted Ryder. Didn't remember him being on that Boston team that beat us.

 

I always find it interesting on what deals could've been made or potential players of target.

He was also there the year Boston was up 3-0 in the series against Philly, Philly forced a game 7, Boston was up 3-0 in the game and blew a 3 game series lead and a 3 goal lead in game 7... They learned a lot from that series loss.

Edited April 22, 2020 by knucklehead91

[DownUndaCanuck]

That team was built around a solid core, which was the trend back then. You had to had your key 7 guys to win in the playoffs. The Kings and Blackhawks did it with a super 7 and loaded up at the TDL, and we had a great core with the Sedins, Kesler, Burrows, Edler, Ehrhoff and Luongo.

 

There's been some strong teams since, namely the Bruins and Capitals, but neither are as dominant as those 2010-2012 Canucks were. You could say the Bruins were better built (and still are) for the playoffs and they've got a fantastic core revolving around Marchand, Bergeron and Chara with pieces moving in and out of the core like Krejci and now Pastrnak.

 

Looking forward, the question is, do we have a similar core developing? Petey, Miller, Horvat, Boeser, Hughes and Marky/Demko are all certainly good, and all have the potential to be as good as 2011, but it's a long way to go for Pettersson and Miller to become 100pt players, Horvat to win a Selke and Demko to be a 47-win Vezina nominee...

[Kevin Biestra]

15 hours ago, Baratheon said:

Man you guys are killing me with this thread.  Reminding me of all the things that irritated me most.  The Sedins should not be blamed for that series.  They absolutely played correctly.  That clip that people play of Daniel getting punched is called drawing a penalty.  Vancouver actually did a good job of getting under the Bruins skin.  The idea is that the Bruins will then start to be undisciplined and that's exactly what happened.  The refs just happened to let them get away with it rather than do their jobs.  

 

I am a boxing guy!  Throwing hands is kind of my jam.  So it's weird for me to find myself on the opposite side of the "toughness" crowd.  I have just never seen the criticisms of the 2011 team presented in a compelling enough way that I believe it.  We got screwed guys.  It's as simple as that.  If anyone needs to do a better job of standing up for the team it's us fans and not the players. 

 

Well, as to Daniel getting punched...  I guess I would just say that other teams wouldn't have even tried to do that Linden or Smyl, let alone pre-Canucks Messier, Bobby Clarke or Denis Potvin or a whole host of other captains or quasi-captains.  Marchand's speedbagging of Daniel's face was the act of a man who knew there were no consequences for his actions, yes from the referees, but also from the other team.  Even in a game with no referees, you would not have seen that done to Linden or Smyl or Bure etc. because they would deal with you themselves, or a player like Gretzky because the team would take care of it.

 

Marchand is just like, wow, my dog wouldn't even let me do this to him.

 

So...yes, it's obvious that fighting was not part of the Sedins' game.  But between the Canucks and the refs, it became clear by the end of the series that, "yes you can do that to us."  How many championship teams will let you do that to them?

 

I enjoyed that 2011 run and was and am proud of the team, but at the same time, I won't say that every tiny detail of their game was above reproach or criticism.

 

Take game 7...  The Canucks got two power plays and the Bruins got one.  The Canucks were down 2-0 in the second period, and they get a power play.  Exactly when they need one, and a goal here is exactly what the doctor ordered.  We're supposed to kill them on the power play, right?  Isn't that the plan?  What happens...  The Canucks allow a shorthanded goal and now they're down 3-0 and the series is over.

 

The team did a great job in 2011.  Went almost all the way.  But that was not a 1994 type of Game 7.

 

I'm in agreement with virtually every bit of praise foisted upon the 2011 team.  I just don't think it's blaspheming to say there were flaws.

 

[spook007]

On 4/19/2020 at 9:39 PM, 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.

Thank you... this needed to be said. Crazy to hear some of the negativity here... 

It was one incredible team.... and losing the seven games Stanley Cup final won't change that...

[Kevin Biestra]

7 hours ago, DownUndaCanuck said:

Looking forward, the question is, do we have a similar core developing? Petey, Miller, Horvat, Boeser, Hughes and Marky/Demko are all certainly good, and all have the potential to be as good as 2011, but it's a long way to go for Pettersson and Miller to become 100pt players, Horvat to win a Selke and Demko to be a 47-win Vezina nominee...

 

I think Horvat's actually pretty close to being a Selke finalist.  The second the team is good enough that he isn't a minus player (has never happened yet) he'll be top 5 in voting as long as his faceoffs don't drop off a cliff.

[I'm Your Huckleberry]

Part II is up today: https://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/vancouver-canucks-best-team-history-part-2/

 

I really enjoyed both of these articles, despite having to re-live some painful memories. I can't help but wonder whether Bieksa's new career, and his relationships with some of the mainstream media, is helping change how that 2011 team is portrayed in the media. Whatever the reason, it's refreshing to see.

 

For those of you who haven't read either article, I urge you to do so. They are essentially just a compilation of quotes from a variety of team personalities over the years, including players, coaches, management, trainers, and staff. Part I deals with the team's rise to 2011, and Part II deals with the 2011 season and fallout. 

 

The highlight of these articles, for me, was the insight into team chemistry and organizational culture.  Watching the team at the time, it was obvious how close the players were. The comradery was evident not only on the ice but also in any video produced by the team during those years. This article only builds upon that. It seems like this team really had a lasting impact on all of the players, even those who were only with the team for a short time. People who were frustrated with their individual situation (e.g. Keith Ballard) clearly still have a lot of respect for that team. Furthermore, the article provides some insight regarding organizational alignment and the culture around the team. It seems like everybody knew their role, everybody was on board with management's vision of the team, everybody communicated honestly, and everybody was given an opportunity to be heard. While Mike Gillis may have had some shortcomings, he definitely deserves praise for building the culture that enabled this team to be great. 

 

These articles were also painful to read. It's clear these people are still hurting and have regrets about how everything unfolded. I get the sense a lot of them feel like they were competing against the Bruins AND the league, but they are competitors and look inward for things they could have done differently rather than make excuses. Depth defenceman Aaron Rome is still carrying the weight of the world on his shoulders because he believes he was solely responsible for the loss. If there was any doubt, this article makes clear just how much heart and competitiveness that whole team had. These guys gave everything they had for us and should be celebrated.

 

Edited April 22, 2020 by I'm Your Huckleberry

[Squamfan]

5 hours ago, I'm Your Huckleberry said:

Part II is up today: https://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/vancouver-canucks-best-team-history-part-2/

 

I really enjoyed both of these articles, despite having to re-live some painful memories. I can't help but wonder whether Bieksa's new career, and his relationships with some of the mainstream media, is helping change how that 2011 team is portrayed in the media. Whatever the reason, it's refreshing to see.

 

For those of you who haven't read either article, I urge you to do so. They are essentially just a compilation of quotes from a variety of team personalities over the years, including players, coaches, management, trainers, and staff. Part I deals with the team's rise to 2011, and Part II deals with the 2011 season and fallout. 

 

The highlight of these articles, for me, was the insight into team chemistry and organizational culture.  Watching the team at the time, it was obvious how close the players were. The comradery was evident not only on the ice but also in any video produced by the team during those years. This article only builds upon that. It seems like this team really had a lasting impact on all of the players, even those who were only with the team for a short time. People who were frustrated with their individual situation (e.g. Keith Ballard) clearly still have a lot of respect for that team. Furthermore, the article provides some insight regarding organizational alignment and the culture around the team. It seems like everybody knew their role, everybody was on board with management's vision of the team, everybody communicated honestly, and everybody was given an opportunity to be heard. While Mike Gillis may have had some shortcomings, he definitely deserves praise for building the culture that enabled this team to be great. 

 

These articles were also painful to read. It's clear these people are still hurting and have regrets about how everything unfolded. I get the sense a lot of them feel like they were competing against the Bruins AND the league, but they are competitors and look inward for things they could have done differently rather than make excuses. Depth defenceman Aaron Rome is still carrying the weight of the world on his shoulders because he believes he was solely responsible for the loss. If there was any doubt, this article makes clear just how much heart and competitiveness that whole team had. These guys gave everything they had for us and should be celebrated.

 

One of these days something is going to leak about the league helping the bruins during the 2011 season and it’s going to be the biggest cheating scandal in the history of professional sports. When your dad works works for the league, and previously emails where leaked on how he asked refs to go easy on your son something is very wrong. It also does not help when Bettman and Daily continually when into Jacobs office with knee pads

[I'm Your Huckleberry]

3 hours ago, Squamfan said:

One of these days something is going to leak about the league helping the bruins during the 2011 season and it’s going to be the biggest cheating scandal in the history of professional sports. When your dad works works for the league, and previously emails where leaked on how he asked refs to go easy on your son something is very wrong. It also does not help when Bettman and Daily continually when into Jacobs office with knee pads

I was surprised how quickly that was pushed under the rug. It’s difficult to believe it ended there and nothing more was done, but I am sure everybody involved learned a lot from those leaks. 

 

That incident was full blown corruption at worst, and extremely unprofessional at best. Either way, he should’ve resigned or been fired for harming the integrity of the league. We can only hope things have improved since then, but that 2011 series definitely didn’t inspire optimism.

[Baratheon]

On 4/22/2020 at 1:49 AM, Kevin Biestra said:

 

Well, as to Daniel getting punched...  I guess I would just say that other teams wouldn't have even tried to do that Linden or Smyl, let alone pre-Canucks Messier, Bobby Clarke or Denis Potvin or a whole host of other captains or quasi-captains.  Marchand's speedbagging of Daniel's face was the act of a man who knew there were no consequences for his actions, yes from the referees, but also from the other team.  Even in a game with no referees, you would not have seen that done to Linden or Smyl or Bure etc. because they would deal with you themselves, or a player like Gretzky because the team would take care of it.

 

Marchand is just like, wow, my dog wouldn't even let me do this to him.

 

So...yes, it's obvious that fighting was not part of the Sedins' game.  But between the Canucks and the refs, it became clear by the end of the series that, "yes you can do that to us."  How many championship teams will let you do that to them?

 

I enjoyed that 2011 run and was and am proud of the team, but at the same time, I won't say that every tiny detail of their game was above reproach or criticism.

 

Take game 7...  The Canucks got two power plays and the Bruins got one.  The Canucks were down 2-0 in the second period, and they get a power play.  Exactly when they need one, and a goal here is exactly what the doctor ordered.  We're supposed to kill them on the power play, right?  Isn't that the plan?  What happens...  The Canucks allow a shorthanded goal and now they're down 3-0 and the series is over.

 

The team did a great job in 2011.  Went almost all the way.  But that was not a 1994 type of Game 7.

 

I'm in agreement with virtually every bit of praise foisted upon the 2011 team.  I just don't think it's blaspheming to say there were flaws.

 

You know those are some fair points and I appreciate the way you put them.  No team is above criticism you are absolutely right.  I have noticed that the main thrust of conversation around 2011 is always a negative one around the team however.  I am still saying that the main reason why we lost is that we were screwed.  That only ever seems to be brought up as an afterthought.

 

Your points on game 7 are the most damning of our team that year but it is accurate.  I think it had all gotten too overwhelming by that point.  There actually were quite a few times when our players did try to stand up to the Bruins but they'd get ganged up on by 2 or 3 of them.  We just weren't geared towards some kind of weird gang war (and we shouldn't have had to be)

 

Now I do want to address what you said about people not daring to try something like that against the 1994 Canucks.  That is unfortunately a bit of a myth that gets spread around and makes the more modern Canuck teams look bad.  Were the Canucks teams of the past tougher?  Yes! (most teams back then were)  People took runs at Bure's knees all the time.  I can remember being furious about it so it's quite a vivid memory lol.  What the Rangers/Messier did to Linden at the end of game 6 is another example.

[Kevin Biestra]

22 minutes ago, Baratheon said:

Now I do want to address what you said about people not daring to try something like that against the 1994 Canucks.  That is unfortunately a bit of a myth that gets spread around and makes the more modern Canuck teams look bad.  Were the Canucks teams of the past tougher?  Yes! (most teams back then were)  People took runs at Bure's knees all the time.  I can remember being furious about it so it's quite a vivid memory lol.  What the Rangers/Messier did to Linden at the end of game 6 is another example.

 

Messier was a coward and did it to Linden literally at the end of the game, when the teams would be heading to their dressing rooms in 10 seconds.

 

Maybe he would have done it mid-game, maybe not.  But he did it when the game was over and he could scurry off to his changing room like the beeyatch he was.

 

People went after Bure's knees, but people went after Neely's knees.  Ulf Samuelsson made a career out of taking out Neely's knees.  And to be honest, kneeing was just then starting to be recognized as the dirty play that it was, just like headshots wouldn't get their due until after Scott Stevens' heyday.  And submarineing a guy's knees was kind of a different play from slapping them in the face repeatedly.  Kneeing is kind of a "hockey play" of sorts, like a headshot in a bodycheck gone wrong or used wrong.  But it's not standing there toe to toe and letting the whole world know that the other guy is your plaything for as long as you want him to be.

 

So...my answer is that...sure, the 82 and 94 teams both got slashed and hit hard and probably hit from behind and kneed and all of that.  But I don't think anyone either did or thought they could grab any player on those teams and slap their face over and over again without consequence.  I don't think they would have tried, and if they had tried, they wouldn't have been able to do it with impunity.

 

If someone, some rat punk like say...Messier, or some sh** stirrer like Glenn Anderson had started to punch Cliff Ronning's face over and over again like a speedbag...well, for one, Cliff Ronning wouldn't have taken it.  They'd have gotten punched back or gotten his stick.  But even if Ronning was in a forgiving mood, Sergio Momesso would not have been, and the result would have been Mark Messier possibly fighting and probably running from Momesso, and Glenn Anderson certainly running away from Momesso.

 

Thomas Gradin was the Sedin of the 1982 Canucks.  If anyone can find me a clip of him getting disrespected for that length of time with no ramifications during the 1982 run, I will stand corrected.  But I'm pretty certain that such a clip is impossible to find because anyone who did that would be dealing with Tiger Williams, Curt Fraser, Stan Smyl, Harold Snepsts, Marc Crawford, Jim Nill or Ron Delorme.

 

Edited April 23, 2020 by Kevin Biestra

[Baratheon]

14 minutes ago, Kevin Biestra said:

 

Messier was a coward and did it to Linden literally at the end of the game, when the teams would be heading to their dressing rooms in 10 seconds.

 

Maybe he would have done it mid-game, maybe not.  But he did it when the game was over and he could scurry off to his changing room like the beeyatch he was.

 

People went after Bure's knees, but people went after Neely's knees.  Ulf Samuelsson made a career out of taking out Neely's knees.  And to be honest, kneeing was just then starting to be recognized as the dirty play that it was, just like headshots wouldn't get their due until after Scott Stevens' heyday.  And submarineing a guy's knees was kind of a different play from slapping them in the face repeatedly.  Kneeing is kind of a "hockey play" of sorts, like a headshot in a bodycheck gone wrong or used wrong.  But it's not standing there toe to toe and letting the whole world know that the other guy is your plaything for as long as you want him to be.

 

So...my answer is that...sure, the 82 and 94 teams both got slashed and hit hard and probably hit from behind and kneed and all of that.  But I don't think anyone either did or thought they could grab any player on those teams and slap their face over and over again without consequence.  I don't think they would have tried, and if they had tried, they wouldn't have been able to do it with impunity.

 

If someone, some rat punk like say...Messier, or some sh** stirrer like Glenn Anderson had started to punch Cliff Ronning's face over and over again like a speedbag...well, for one, Cliff Ronning wouldn't have taken it.  They'd have gotten punched back or gotten his stick.  But even if Ronning was in a forgiving mood, Sergio Momesso would not have been, and the result would have been Mark Messier possibly fighting and probably running from Momesso, and Glenn Anderson certainly running away from Momesso.

 

Thomas Gradin was the Sedin of the 1982 Canucks.  If anyone can find me a clip of him getting disrespected for that length of time with no ramifications during the 1982 run, I will stand corrected.  But I'm pretty certain that such a clip is impossible to find because anyone who did that would be dealing with Tiger Williams, Curt Fraser, Stan Smyl, Harold Snepsts, Marc Crawford, Jim Nill or Ron Delorme.

 

I'm not going to deny that the 94 team and 80's teams were tougher than 2011.  You're comparing vastly different eras of hockey however.  If you'll remember part of my frustration is how the league preached a certain officiating standard that started after the 2005 lockout.  They seamed to be sticking to that standard and all was well.  Until one individual series that just so happened to be our shot.  In 82 when Bobby Clarke was still running around swinging his stick like a sword it was pretty well known what you were gonna need on your team.  The 82 and 94 teams didn't have to fight against the league the way 2011 did.

 

Again I think the 2011 team did try to stand up for itself but got ganged up on by Bruins and then not supported by the refs in any way.  I think we are all very proud of the way teh 94 and 82 teams fought their way against the odds.  And we should be!  In 2011 realistically we probably shouldn't have had to even struggle.  If that Bruins series had been called anything similar to any other series since the lockout then we probably beat the Bruins in 5 if not sweep them completely.  

 

Don't get me wrong!  I do wish that we still had Rick Rypien (RIP) to dart over there and obliterate Marchand but I don't think that it should have been necessary.  I also think that the "speedbagging' incident looked worse than it actually was.  I can tell you from personal experience that shots like that (although they are annoying!) don't really hurt or do much of anything.  Daniel really was just trying to draw a penalty there.  He didn't even feel the need to put his hands up or grab on to Marchand or anything.  If Daniel had been a UFC fighter that is where you would see him laugh at the guy.  Unfortunately Daniel is an ultra classy hockey player so it looks more like he's just being bullied.

 

 

[Kevin Biestra]

24 minutes ago, Baratheon said:

Again I think the 2011 team did try to stand up for itself but got ganged up on by Bruins and then not supported by the refs in any way.  I think we are all very proud of the way teh 94 and 82 teams fought their way against the odds.  And we should be!  In 2011 realistically we probably shouldn't have had to even struggle.  If that Bruins series had been called anything similar to any other series since the lockout then we probably beat the Bruins in 5 if not sweep them completely.  

 

Don't get me wrong!  I do wish that we still had Rick Rypien (RIP) to dart over there and obliterate Marchand but I don't think that it should have been necessary.  I also think that the "speedbagging' incident looked worse than it actually was.  I can tell you from personal experience that shots like that (although they are annoying!) don't really hurt or do much of anything.  Daniel really was just trying to draw a penalty there.  He didn't even feel the need to put his hands up or grab on to Marchand or anything.  If Daniel had been a UFC fighter that is where you would see him laugh at the guy.  Unfortunately Daniel is an ultra classy hockey player so it looks more like he's just being bullied.

 

Re: your first paragraph...  I agree, but their will to resist got broken.  Part of Stan Smyl's legend is emerging as a leader under fire in 1982.  If the refs weren't going to do anything, and the Canucks were going to get beaten down like a whack-a-mole any time they tried to stand up for themselves...it was time for a hero to rise.

 

Like I said, I'm proud of the 2011 team, grateful for the run and have the utmost respect for the Sedins.  But when the Canucks were getting gang slapped for resisting the bullying...someone had to stand up and say "I am Spartacus."

 

The same thing happened to the Oilers against the Islanders in the 1983 final.  The Oilers just got broken.  But they learned from it.

 

I agree, the refs and league screwed us.  The Aaron Rome suspension is the worst suspension I've ever seen in NHL history.  Who knows, maybe he would have made a difference somewhere in the last 4 games of the series.

 

I'm not necessarily criticizing Daniel personally for letting himself get speedbagged.  By then the refs and the Canucks had effectively let Marchand know it was okay.

 

That's kind of the difference between Smyl and Williams vs. Kesler and Burrows.  Stan or Tiger would stand toe to toe with you and send you to the trainer's room for stitches.  Kesler and Burrows would insult your mother until you slashed them in front of the referee.  The 2011 team was built for skill, no doubt, but it also had a lot of mother insulters relative to bone crushers.

 

 

Edited April 23, 2020 by Kevin Biestra

[Baratheon]

40 minutes ago, Kevin Biestra said:

 

Re: your first paragraph...  I agree, but their will to resist got broken.  Part of Stan Smyl's legend is emerging as a leader under fire in 1982.  If the refs weren't going to do anything, and the Canucks were going to get beaten down like a whack-a-mole any time they tried to stand up for themselves...it was time for a hero to rise.

 

Like I said, I'm proud of the 2011 team, grateful for the run and have the utmost respect for the Sedins.  But when the Canucks were getting gang slapped for resisting the bullying...someone had to stand up and say "I am Spartacus."

 

The same thing happened to the Oilers against the Islanders in the 1983 final.  The Oilers just got broken.  But they learned from it.

 

I agree, the refs and league screwed us.  The Aaron Rome suspension is the worst suspension I've ever seen in NHL history.  Who knows, maybe he would have made a difference somewhere in the last 4 games of the series.

 

I'm not necessarily criticizing Daniel personally for letting himself get speedbagged.  By then the refs and the Canucks had effectively let Marchand know it was okay.

 

That's kind of the difference between Smyl and Williams vs. Kesler and Burrows.  Stan or Tiger would stand toe to toe with you and send you to the trainer's room for stitches.  Kesler and Burrows would insult your mother until you slashed them in front of the referee.  The 2011 team was built for skill, no doubt, but it also had a lot of mother insulters relative to bone crushers.

 

 

Yeah I think we're both pretty much on the same page.  My main issue is more just how 2011 conversations seem to go (not only here but I have heard it all over the place).  The dominant team that we had as well as the screw job by the league (usually) are brought up almost as afterthoughts.  

 

I think you're right about the Canucks' will getting broken (hence what we saw in Game 7) but I'm just choked that it was ever allowed to get to that point.  Chicago and San Jose were hardly saints either but the league didn't just roll out the red carpet for them.

 

And yeah!  You're not going to get me to say anything negative about Stan freaking Smyl!!  If we could get Doctor Who to time warp Stan Smyl on to either the 1994 or 2011 teams we'd win them both! lol

[khay]

On 4/22/2020 at 1:49 AM, Kevin Biestra said:

 

Well, as to Daniel getting punched...  I guess I would just say that other teams wouldn't have even tried to do that Linden or Smyl, let alone pre-Canucks Messier, Bobby Clarke or Denis Potvin or a whole host of other captains or quasi-captains.  Marchand's speedbagging of Daniel's face was the act of a man who knew there were no consequences for his actions, yes from the referees, but also from the other team.  Even in a game with no referees, you would not have seen that done to Linden or Smyl or Bure etc. because they would deal with you themselves, or a player like Gretzky because the team would take care of it.

 

Marchand is just like, wow, my dog wouldn't even let me do this to him.

 

So...yes, it's obvious that fighting was not part of the Sedins' game.  But between the Canucks and the refs, it became clear by the end of the series that, "yes you can do that to us."  How many championship teams will let you do that to them?

 

I enjoyed that 2011 run and was and am proud of the team, but at the same time, I won't say that every tiny detail of their game was above reproach or criticism.

 

Take game 7...  The Canucks got two power plays and the Bruins got one.  The Canucks were down 2-0 in the second period, and they get a power play.  Exactly when they need one, and a goal here is exactly what the doctor ordered.  We're supposed to kill them on the power play, right?  Isn't that the plan?  What happens...  The Canucks allow a shorthanded goal and now they're down 3-0 and the series is over.

 

The team did a great job in 2011.  Went almost all the way.  But that was not a 1994 type of Game 7.

 

I'm in agreement with virtually every bit of praise foisted upon the 2011 team.  I just don't think it's blaspheming to say there were flaws.

 

Funny thing is Boston lost to Blues last season in game 7 similar to the way we lost game 7 in 2011. They just couldn't get anything working, the other team figured you out and was very efficient in defending, with a hot goalie backing them up.

 

In my opinion, we had to win that series before game 7 and I think of game 3 Rome hit as the turning point. Before that hit, Boston was the team that had nothing going. It almost looked like we were on our way to a 1-0 or 2-1 win in that game. After that hit, Boston ramped up the physical plays (some borderline cheap and dirty) and they found a way. Us on the other had, still couldn't get things going and Boston's defence got more proficient as the series went on.

 

Bottom line is that we had a great core but we didn't have a game breaker that could have single handedly win you a game when nothing is going right.

 

What makes me hopeful about the current team is that we have some potential game breakers. EP, Hughes, maybe Boeser, Bo with bull rush, and even Hoglander. Can't wait for the season to resume. Hopefully it will.

[CanadianRugby]

Probably the most behind the scenes article you will ever see.  Interesting but painful to read.  I got into a twitter war with Boston fans because of this. 

[CanadianRugby]

On 4/21/2020 at 10:10 AM, Baratheon said:

Man you guys are killing me with this thread.  Reminding me of all the things that irritated me most.  The Sedins should not be blamed for that series.  They absolutely played correctly.  That clip that people play of Daniel getting punched is called drawing a penalty.  Vancouver actually did a good job of getting under the Bruins skin.  The idea is that the Bruins will then start to be undisciplined and that's exactly what happened.  The refs just happened to let them get away with it rather than do their jobs.  

 

I am a boxing guy!  Throwing hands is kind of my jam.  So it's weird for me to find myself on the opposite side of the "toughness" crowd.  I have just never seen the criticisms of the 2011 team presented in a compelling enough way that I believe it.  We got screwed guys.  It's as simple as that.  If anyone needs to do a better job of standing up for the team it's us fans and not the players. 

Of course you prefer to have a tough team, but the 2011 Canucks were never going to win because of toughness.  Of course I'm generalizing but I find people that don't fight or play contact sports, they're the ones that are fastest to criticize a "soft" team or player.  

[alt kilgore]

On 4/21/2020 at 10:10 AM, Baratheon said:

Man you guys are killing me with this thread.  Reminding me of all the things that irritated me most.  The Sedins should not be blamed for that series.  They absolutely played correctly.  That clip that people play of Daniel getting punched is called drawing a penalty.  Vancouver actually did a good job of getting under the Bruins skin.  The idea is that the Bruins will then start to be undisciplined and that's exactly what happened.  The refs just happened to let them get away with it rather than do their jobs.  

 

I am a boxing guy!  Throwing hands is kind of my jam.  So it's weird for me to find myself on the opposite side of the "toughness" crowd.  I have just never seen the criticisms of the 2011 team presented in a compelling enough way that I believe it.  We got screwed guys.  It's as simple as that.  If anyone needs to do a better job of standing up for the team it's us fans and not the players. 

I wouldn't blame the Sedins for losing the series either.  They were banged up as much as anyone. It was mostly the loss of key players due to injury from previous series. I'd include Rome in there as well, with so many other players out, we needed that size at least. So they had not much secondary support on the ice.

 

But I take umbrage with your its "called drawing a penalty".  Daniel got a ten minute misconduct out of that for daring to tell Sutherland to do his job. How much did that 10 minutes without him on the ice alter the game result? A roughing penalty would only have him off for 2 min. and even a fighting major, which would never have happened, would only have been 5.  That was not playing "correctly". Not for a SCF game. And not after it was clear that the refs had put away their whistles for the season. AV should have recognized this and abandoned the "turn the other cheek, we'll make them pay on the PP" strategy. Because for one thing, when they got a PP, they were so rattled and cowed by the Bruins no-consequence abuse, which finally drew the PP, that they couldn't refocus instantly in time for two minutes of confident dominant play. One result was a killer short handed goal in game 7. That kind of trepidation indirectly was a cause of our downfall.

.

.

Edited April 25, 2020 by kilgore