Sign in to follow this  
-AJ-

Top 50 Canucks of All-Time - #39

Rate this topic

Top 50 Canucks of All-Time - #39  

57 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

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Kevin Biestra said:

 

Yeah, there are some players where I can tell how not experiencing their impact real-time got lost in translation to some of the next generation.

 

Tiger Williams and Gino Odjick perhaps most of all.  And if people weren't around while Harold Snepsts was capturing the city, with his hair thinning yet flowing like 1980s Sting as he skated around the ice, then it's just like...who is this old guy that didn't score many points?  Or your boy Momesso.

 

The guys who get their jerseys retired or put in the ROH, that helps a little bit with name recognition, but without that impetus to Remember The Name, you have to fight for Gary Smith and Curt Fraser, Tiger and Gino and Murzyn and Oddleifson, etc.

 

 

 

 

Hey I get it and I’m doing it too.  I’m sure someone who’s watched from the beginning might look at my Momesso props and think of someone else from the 70’s or 80’s and I think - “hey wait a minute”.   Fraser deserves to be in top 45-55 too...scored 28 goals in 1982 and was fourth in scoring with 67 points...him and Delmore were a difficult pair to handle ... and he was good enough to get us Tanti.  I have a soft spot for guys that were tough as nails and did anything and everything for the team.    Sometimes my back gets up a bit when monkey business happens and players get forgotten.   As far as this list goes I’m pleasantly surprised that more hasn’t happened - for the most it’s been ok and most players have at least been mentioned that should make the top 50 and by enough folks that it’s pretty cool.
 

Craig Coxe .... does anyone know what he was involved in?  Let’s just say Doug Glatt and Shea would be proud.  
 

edit:  I just changed my vote from Butcher to Rota to do my part in keeping the monkey business at bay.  

Edited by IBatch
  • Vintage 1

Share this post


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

Hey I get it and I’m doing it too.  I’m sure someone who’s watched from the beginning might look at my Momesso props and think of someone else from the 70’s or 80’s and I think - “hey wait a minute”.   Fraser deserves to be in top 45-55 too...scored 28 goals in 1982 and was fourth in scoring with 67 points...him and Delmore were a difficult pair to handle ... and he was good enough to get us Tanti.  I have a soft spot for guys that were tough as nails and did anything and everything for the team.    Sometimes my back gets up a bit when monkey business happens and players get forgotten.   As far as this list goes I’m pleasantly surprised that more hasn’t happened - for the most it’s been ok and most players have at least been mentioned that should make the top 50 and by enough folks that it’s pretty cool.
 

Craig Coxe .... does anyone know what he was involved in?  Let’s just say Doug Glatt and Shea would be proud.  

 

Man those old teams had toughness to spare.  Coxe and Stern out the door with little worry about who was going to stand up for who...

 

I liked Momesso a lot.  I remember him crying at the end of Game 7 against the Rangers, him and Murray Craven.  Those guys didn't have one extra ounce of anything left over that they didn't give on the ice.

 

Yeah, I said somewhere way back when in these threads that heart and passion are the most important things in my kind of hockey.  It's what made those mostly crappy 70s and 80s teams still a night where the Canadiens or Oilers or Islanders had to earn their paychecks on Renfrew.

 

It's why I kind of grudgingly put Mogilny in the top 30 for his great scoring achievements.

 

Seemed like every 2nd player on the 82 team was an enforcer of some kind, and every third player on the 94 team.  Both those teams...heart and fire.

 

 

 

I love the 2011 team too, but as I also said earlier...a lot more guys that will insult your mother in the scrum rather than stand toe to toe with you until one of you goes down.

 

  • Like 1
  • Hydration 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Master Mind said:

Voting Butcher

 

Nominating Cloutier

I think if Dan Cloutier doesn't get hurt in Game 3 vs Calgary 2004, he's probably on this list.... top 20 maybe... that team was cup bound and he was legit playing his best hockey. He would have been a center piece of the run.

 

Then again the NHL taking Bert off our roster was probably a bigger reason why the 2004 team didn't go all the way.

 

 

  • Hydration 1
  • Vintage 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, apollo said:

I think if Dan Cloutier doesn't get hurt in Game 3 vs Calgary 2004, he's probably on this list.... top 20 maybe... that team was cup bound and he was legit playing his best hockey. He would have been a center piece of the run.

 

Then again the NHL taking Bert off our roster was probably a bigger reason why the 2004 team didn't go all the way.

 

 

Yeah I can't imagine the 04 Canucks going all the way without Bertuzzi, but I agree if the Canucks had made a SCF during his tenure, then he's probably seen as top 20.

 

He's still one of the better goalies this franchise has ever had, even if him time here was brief, so I think he's due to get in the poll.

  • Sedinery 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, apollo said:

I think if Dan Cloutier doesn't get hurt in Game 3 vs Calgary 2004, he's probably on this list.... top 20 maybe... that team was cup bound and he was legit playing his best hockey. He would have been a center piece of the run.

 

Then again the NHL taking Bert off our roster was probably a bigger reason why the 2004 team didn't go all the way.

 

 

I like Cloutier too.   Always wanted him to take the media criticism and shove it up you know where.  Had his chances but ended up with the worst playoff sp all-time for anyone who played 25 plus games.    The WCE guys aside from Morrison often hung  the defense and Cloutier out to dry...  We’ve never had a goalie like him before or since.   Imagine Marksrom getting mad and pummeling some poor fool.  Cloutier was the only goalie we ever had that actually had intimidation as part of his game...few have outside of Billy Smith and Emery.   
 

Too bad...

  • Sedinery 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Master Mind said:

Yeah I can't imagine the 04 Canucks going all the way without Bertuzzi, but I agree if the Canucks had made a SCF during his tenure, then he's probably seen as top 20.

 

He's still one of the better goalies this franchise has ever had, even if him time here was brief, so I think he's due to get in the poll.

 

Yes, surely if Cloutier had redeemed his playoff career by going all the way to the Cup Final at some point, I agree that he would have erased or at least severely diluted his previous failures.

 

The problem is that it never happened.  All he ever did was tank out in the first round, and one time the second.  Yeah, he was looking better than usual in the start of the series in 2004.  But he ALWAYS looked okay in the first half of the series.  The meltdowns usually started midway through, so...I'm guessing he was probably just due to melt down again and perhaps the injury spared him and us from that experience.

 

That said, the guy went to work, played hard, played tough even and was a good teammate by all accounts.

 

He was very mentally fragile it seemed.  He got the Yips right around game 86 of every season...

 

But I liked the guy, cheered for him to succeed...  And I can't say he didn't at least do his part to get us TO the playoffs, regardless of what might have happened thereafter.

  • Hydration 1

Share this post


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

I like Cloutier too.   Always wanted him to take the media criticism and shove it up you know where.  Had his chances but ended up with the worst playoff sp all-time for anyone who played 25 plus games.    The WCE guys aside from Morrison often hung  the defense and Cloutier out to dry...  We’ve never had a goalie like him before or since.   Imagine Marksrom getting mad and pummeling some poor fool.  Cloutier was the only goalie we ever had that actually had intimidation as part of his game...few have outside of Billy Smith and Emery.   
 

Too bad...

 

Bro, you're forgetting the all-time NHL king of goalie enforcers!

 

MV5BM2VmYzNkMDgtNDkyNC00M2ZlLTg1OTktOTcz

 

He didn't just intimidate...  He was arguably the TEAM's enforcer.

  • Hydration 1

Share this post


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


Hmm.   Murzyn was plus 34 one year ... and only a minus play near the end playing in the dark ages Keenan teams which were awful (minus 1 when the rest were minus 15-20ish).  He was even a plus player on some bad Hartford teams.    Don’t think you did your homework on this one.   I’d put him ahead of Tanev, he was way more physical and also blocked shots before it was vogue and extra padding was made to help with this and I doubt like Ludwig he was shoving boards down his socks.   He did anything and everything for this team while he was here, played more games and was here longer.    Tanev didn’t make THNs top 50 ... Murzyn did.  
 

Butchers game was different - and yes he was a bad minus player on some bad teams - but again not as bad as say Lidster was.   And again will point out that he was the player that got us Ronning, Courtnall and Momesso...would Tanev get us anything close to that right now?  Or a year ago?  Nope.  
 

Edit: He also has a Pratt award, in 92-93 when the competition was pretty stiff...as well as the teams alternate C with Momesso in 93-94, 94-95...and later too...

You giving me grief again IBatch?  ;)

What Tanev would get us today is not the question.  Its what he has meant to the team (when playing) during his tenure. 

 

And you are using an example that is considered one of the most lop-sided trades in NHL history.

https://ottawacitizen.com/sports/hockey/nhl/senatorsextra/the-most-lopsided-trade-deadline-deals-ever/

 

I would still contend that Tanev is the better defenseman than Butcher.  Butcher was more physical. But that is not such a rare commodity for defensemen, especially back then. What is rarer is a hockey smart defenseman who can defend and move the puck as quickly and intelligently as CT.

 

  • Confused 1

Share this post


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

You giving me grief again IBatch?  ;)

What Tanev would get us today is not the question.  Its what he has meant to the team (when playing) during his tenure. 

 

And you are using an example that is considered one of the most lop-sided trades in NHL history.

https://ottawacitizen.com/sports/hockey/nhl/senatorsextra/the-most-lopsided-trade-deadline-deals-ever/

 

I would still contend that Tanev is the better defenseman than Butcher.  Butcher was more physical. But that is not such a rare commodity for defensemen, especially back then. What is rarer is a hockey smart defenseman who can defend and move the puck as quickly and intelligently as CT.

 

Well, in Butcher's defense he was an NHL All-Star, a couple years after the trade, and after the trade he very quickly became the captain of the St. Louis Blues, even when Brett Hull had been on the team for a couple years and was scoring 70+ and 80+ goals a year, and Adam Oates was there as well, plus Dave Christian (1980 Miracle on Ice), Curt Giles, Mario Marois, Ron Sutter, Rich Sutter, Brendan Shanahan, etc.

 

I'm not sure that's a more common package than what Tanev brings.

 

Edited by Kevin Biestra
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Rota and Butcher should both be ahead of Tanev but half the voters never saw them play, i get it. They were both more valuable than Tanev.

Edited by Timbermen
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, kilgore said:

You giving me grief again IBatch?  ;)

What Tanev would get us today is not the question.  Its what he has meant to the team (when playing) during his tenure. 

 

And you are using an example that is considered one of the most lop-sided trades in NHL history.

https://ottawacitizen.com/sports/hockey/nhl/senatorsextra/the-most-lopsided-trade-deadline-deals-ever/

 

I would still contend that Tanev is the better defenseman than Butcher.  Butcher was more physical. But that is not such a rare commodity for defensemen, especially back then. What is rarer is a hockey smart defenseman who can defend and move the puck as quickly and intelligently as CT.

 

Sorry about the grief... shouldn’t be but I do think when CT is given the mantle as the “best defensive defenseman we have ever had” people are sleeping on Snepsts, Butcher and Murzyn.   At the time St. Louis was happy to give up what they did - Butcher became their Captain - because he was that respected and despite what we received it was still hard to see him go.   Remember?

  • Thanks 1
  • Burr 1

Share this post


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

Sorry about the grief... shouldn’t be but I do think when CT is given the mantle as the “best defensive defenseman we have ever had” people are sleeping on Snepsts, Butcher and Murzyn.   At the time St. Louis was happy to give up what they did - Butcher became their Captain - because he was that respected and despite what we received it was still hard to see him go.   Remember?

 

Tanev is certainly among our best defensive defensemen, but aside from those guys, it's also not certain that he's better defensively than Babych, Diduck, Hamhuis, Mitchell, even Jim Benning or Pat Quinn.

 

Tanev's real advantage over those guys is tenure.

 

Not to mention Ohlund.

 

 

Edited by Kevin Biestra
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

voted vevergaert  nominate  jim sandlak   , the only guy  I can remember that actually hit gretzky  and shut him down   ,   and murzyn for the top 50  ? come on he was pylon , the only reason we went on a run in 94 is because he  got hurt , if murzyn gets in ill nominate messier  from now on  lol

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, the grinder said:

voted vevergaert  nominate  jim sandlak   , the only guy  I can remember that actually hit gretzky  and shut him down   ,   and murzyn for the top 50  ? come on he was pylon , the only reason we went on a run in 94 is because he  got hurt , if murzyn gets in ill nominate messier  from now on  lol

Oh so skating is all that matters ... can’t wait for the Hedican/Raymond votes ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, the grinder said:

voted vevergaert  nominate  jim sandlak   , the only guy  I can remember that actually hit gretzky  and shut him down   ,   and murzyn for the top 50  ? come on he was pylon , the only reason we went on a run in 94 is because he  got hurt , if murzyn gets in ill nominate messier  from now on  lol

 

The Flames won the Cup with Murzyn in the lineup in 1989.  Just imagine what they would have done without him!

  • Haha 1

Share this post


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

 

Tanev is certainly among our best defensive defensemen, but aside from those guys, it's also not certain that he's better defensively than Babych, Diduck, Hamhuis, Mitchell, even Jim Benning or Pat Quinn.

 

Tanev's real advantage over those guys is tenure.

 

Not to mention Ohlund.

 

 

Of all those guys I’d give it to Mitchell.  And loved Babych/Diduck combo.   What a foolish thing we did letting him go and then instead spending similar money on Ballard plus our first plus...

Share this post


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

Oh so skating is all that matters ... can’t wait for the Hedican/Raymond votes ...

oh  like how every player that just skated around murzyn  like a pylon  ,  butcher lanz  halward mc carthy , were way better  

Share this post


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

 

The Flames won the Cup with Murzyn in the lineup in 1989.  Just imagine what they would have done without him!

then traded him  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Timbermen said:

Rota and Butcher should both be ahead of Tanev but half the voters never saw them play, i get it. They were both more valuable than Tanev.

Butcher possibly but I will tell you categorically that Darcy Rota was never a play driver on any of the first lines he was lucky enough to play on (good for him, he earned and kept his spot). He produced well for a relatively short time and as part of the 82 team, his intensity and drive are forever burned in my mind. He belongs on this list, I believe, but not ahead of either of the two long serving, long suffering d-men mentioned here. 

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.