Sign in to follow this  
-AJ-

Top 50 Canucks of All-Time - #40

Rate this topic

Top 50 Canucks of All-Time - #40  

53 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

14 minutes ago, Nuxfanabroad said:

After a quick scan of these top-40, appears half of them arrived via trade. Historically, trade-returns have been a helluva' lot more favourable to this franchise, compared with draft picks.

 

I'd bet the Habs(for example) top-40 would be composed of 70-80% of their own drafted assets.

Maybe, but in the old days Montreal was the sole team allowed to draft Quebecers, so that can skew things a bit.

  • Hydration 2

Share this post


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

Maybe, but in the old days Montreal was the sole team allowed to draft Quebecers, so that can skew things a bit.

Yes, of course. It's an extreme case to compare with. But if you ran comparisons with about 15, 20 teams(top-40) for say the past 40, 50 yrs, it'd be interesting to see how many franchises unearthed higher percentages of talent from either draft/deals. Say the ratio between the two.

 

I suspect we'd be one of the lowest for draft batting %

Share this post


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

After a quick scan of these top-40, appears half of them arrived via trade. Historically, trade-returns have been a helluva' lot more favourable to this franchise, compared with draft picks.

 

I'd bet the Habs(for example) top-40 would be composed of 70-80% of their own drafted assets.

 

Maybe in total numbers, but five of the six retired jerseys (also the top 6 in this poll) were draft picks.

 

And just looking at the top 40...I would be inclined to say about 50% draft picks, and 50% signings + trades combined.

 

Anyway, yeah, Canucks have wasted a LOT of first round picks.

Edited by Kevin Biestra
  • Hydration 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Am i missing something here? How is gary smith getting votes and Cloutier isn't on the list? He had a longer and more succesful career here so what gives? 

 

Either way, I respect both guys but don't think they belong in the top 50... perhaps Dan at 49 or 50th at best

Edited by apollo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Nuxfanabroad said:

Yes, of course. It's an extreme case to compare with. But if you ran comparisons with about 15, 20 teams(top-40) for say the past 40, 50 yrs, it'd be interesting to see how many franchises unearthed higher percentages of talent from either draft/deals. Say the ratio between the two.

 

I suspect we'd be one of the lowest for draft batting %

I have, on a few occasions, tried to talk someone into doing a comparison of Canuck drafting, versus just going with the best player available as rated by Central Scouting.

It would be a bit of work but would be interesting to see the mistakes and the hits over the years.

Share this post


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

Am i missing something here? How is gary smith getting votes and Cloutier isn't on the list? He had a longer and more succesful career here so what gives? 

 

Either way, I respect both guys but don't think they belong in the top 50... perhaps Dan at 49 or 50th at best

 

There's a 1974-75 division championship banner hanging in the rafters that was the only banner the Canucks had to hang for their first 12 years.  Gary Smith played over 70 games to get us that banner, and was 6th in Hart Trophy voting and 3rd for what is now the Vezina.

 

Dan Cloutier only played 20 more games in his Canuck career than Gary Smith.  He got one 3rd place vote for the All-Star Team one time.  We are all well aware of his playoff record and his tendencies after the last game of the regular season.

 

Anyway, I think most will agree that Cloutier never put the team on his back and carried it to a banner for a season or through a series.

 

Gary Smith is one of very few goalies in our history that have done that.  One of four, I would say.

 

Smith is also one of very few to be Team MVP twice, where I figure it's probably well understood that Cloutier doesn't have any, nor was he ever really a candidate.

 

For what it's worth, I've got Cloutier somewhere in the 60s, and not separated by much from Cesare Maniago and Glen Hanlon.  I also have Cory Schneider (two seasons with a GAA under 2.00) maybe 5 or 10 spots or so ahead of Cloutier.

Edited by Kevin Biestra
  • Hydration 1
  • Vintage 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, gurn said:

I have, on a few occasions, tried to talk someone into doing a comparison of Canuck drafting, versus just going with the best player available as rated by Central Scouting.

It would be a bit of work but would be interesting to see the mistakes and the hits over the years.

 

Ugh, so many bombs.  They did great until about 1985, at which point Jim Sandlak was kind of a 50/50 success.

 

Then the wheels just come off.

 

1986 - Dan Woodley, 7th overall, 5 career games.

1987 - Rob Murphy, 24th overall, 125 games

1988 - Got it right with Linden but they would have had to do some cuckoo stuff to get it wrong with the 2nd overall pick

1989 - Jason Herter, 8th overall, 1 career game

1990 - Nedved - fine

1991 - Stojanov, 7th overall, 107 games

1992 - Libor Polasek, 21st overall, 0 games

1993 - Mike Wilson, 20th overall, 336 games

1994 - Ohlund - fine

1995 - no first round pick, just to avoid embarrassment I think

1996 - Josh Holden, 12th overall, 60 games

1997 - Brad Ference, 10th overall, 250 games

1998 - Bryan Allen - fine, but not great for 4th overall, maybe 20 players picked after him with better careers

1999 - Sedins - home run

2000 - Nathan Smith, 23rd overall, 26 games

 

Things start looking up for a while in 2001, and then go off the bloody rails again in 2007.

 

 

 

Edited by Kevin Biestra
  • Hydration 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, Kevin Biestra said:

 

Ugh, so many bombs.  They did great until about 1985, at which point Jim Sandlak was kind of a 50/50 success.

 

Then the wheels just come off.

 

1986 - Dan Woodley, 7th overall, 5 career games.

1987 - Rob Murphy, 24th overall, 125 games

1988 - Got it right with Linden but they would have had to do some cuckoo stuff to get it wrong with the 2nd overall pick

1989 - Jason Herter, 8th overall, 1 career game

1990 - Nedved - fine

1991 - Stojanov, 7th overall, 107 games

1992 - Libor Polasek, 21st overall, 0 games

1993 - Mike Wilson, 20th overall, 336 games

1994 - Ohlund - fine

1995 - no first round pick, just to avoid embarrassment I think

1996 - Josh Holden, 12th overall, 60 games

1997 - Brad Ference, 10th overall, 250 games

1998 - Bryan Allen - fine, but not great for 4th overall, maybe 20 players picked after him with better careers

1999 - Sedins - home run

2000 - Nathan Smith, 23rd overall, 26 games

 

Things start looking up for a while in 2001, and then go off the bloody rails again in 2007.

 

 

 

I know that the Canucks and every other team have missed on picks. I'd like to see a list of who Central Scouting said we should have picked at our spot; and if that player, or better rated was still available to us. 

 

Edit to add- I'd have done this years ago but dyslexia  really messes with my chart comparison skills.

Edited by gurn

Share this post


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

I know that the Canucks and every other team have missed on picks. I'd like to see a list of who Central Scouting said we should have picked at our spot; and if that player, or better rated was still available to us. 

 

Well, I did half your work for you.  You're free to do the other half.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


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

Am i missing something here? How is gary smith getting votes and Cloutier isn't on the list? He had a longer and more succesful career here so what gives? 

 

Either way, I respect both guys but don't think they belong in the top 50... perhaps Dan at 49 or 50th at best

Smith's highs were far above Cloutier's highs. As @Kevin Biestra said, he was insane in 1974-75 particularly. The only edge Cloutier has over Smith is longevity--I feel that Smith beat him in every other category and I don't think Cloutier's longevity is enough to overcome Smith's performance edge. Obviously Cloutier had a better win percentage, but the team in front of Cloutier in the early 2000s was far better than the teams in from of Smith in the mid 70s.

  • Sedinery 1
  • Vintage 1

Share this post


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

Maybe, but in the old days Montreal was the sole team allowed to draft Quebecers, so that can skew things a bit.

And to rub it  in (Quebec) ..  once the rules changed Boston drafted Dryden...and then traded him to MTL for three guys that never played in the NHL and went on to throw a wrench in their Orr dynasty plans and later become a huge part in the greatest team ever. 

Edited by IBatch

Share this post


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

 

There's a 1974-75 division championship banner hanging in the rafters that was the only banner the Canucks had to hang for their first 12 years.  Gary Smith played over 70 games to get us that banner, and was 6th in Hart Trophy voting and 3rd for what is now the Vezina.

 

Dan Cloutier only played 20 more games in his Canuck career than Gary Smith.  He got one 3rd place vote for the All-Star Team one time.  We are all well aware of his playoff record and his tendencies after the last game of the regular season.

 

Anyway, I think most will agree that Cloutier never put the team on his back and carried it to a banner for a season or through a series.

 

Gary Smith is one of very few goalies in our history that have done that.  One of four, I would say.

 

Smith is also one of very few to be Team MVP twice, where I figure it's probably well understood that Cloutier doesn't have any, nor was he ever really a candidate.

 

For what it's worth, I've got Cloutier somewhere in the 60s, and not separated by much from Cesare Maniago and Glen Hanlon.  I also have Cory Schneider (two seasons with a GAA under 2.00) maybe 5 or 10 spots or so ahead of Cloutier.

Well I'm sold. Thanks for explaining! 

 

Didn't know he was 6th in hart and 3rd in vezina during his time here... And twice team MVP. I'm voting him in next! 

  • Hydration 1
  • Vintage 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Kevin Biestra said:

 

A few threads ago I pointed out who we could have drafted in 1990...

 

We could have had Jagr, Martin Brodeur and Doug Weight instead of our first three picks that year.

 

Basically set for goalie post-McLean until 2015 or whenever.

 

Then Sergei Zubov in the 4th round instead of...Darin Bader.

 

Robert Lang in the 6th instead of...Daryl Filipek.

 

And Peter Bondra in the 8th instead of...Paul O'Hagan.

 

We could have had a dynasty for 10 years just from what we passed over in the 1990 draft.  And that's not mentioning that we'd have been adding these guys to our 1990 core - Linden, McLean, Adams, etc. and there was nothing stopping us from still trading for Ronning, Courtnall, Craven, Momesso, etc. or drafting Bure (already drafted).  Or keeping Larionov.

Quin hit a huge home run with Bure and they really hoodwinked the rest of the league with that one (it was legal - they knew he had played one more game then was recorded as they had the program for it - which was required) ... and had Jagr higher then Nedved  but didn’t want to take the risk having already dealt with the headaches with Larionov and Krutov to get them over and weren’t willing to risk it.  But missing on the Antoski pick was all on Quin - his guys wanted Keith Tkachuk but he vetoed it (and later swore he’d never make that mistake twice).   Jagr also told other teams he wouldn’t report ... except for PIT so they get a pass on that one.   Made some great trades and drafted Bure ... but made some mistakes too (which a lot of other teams do too).  JB deserves a lot of credit - he’s made mistakes - but seemingly at a lower rate then his predecessor’s. 

  • Vintage 1

Share this post


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

Well I'm sold. Thanks for explaining! 

 

Didn't know he was 6th in hart and 3rd in vezina during his time here... And twice team MVP. I'm voting him in next! 

 

giphy.gif

 

  • Upvote 1
  • Sedinery 1

Share this post


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

Well I'm sold. Thanks for explaining! 

 

Didn't know he was 6th in hart and 3rd in vezina during his time here... And twice team MVP. I'm voting him in next! 

 

Back then the Vezina was the Jennings, and the 1st Team All-Star was the Vezina.

 

But Gary Smith actually won one of the old Vezinas as well before joining the Canucks.

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

 

Maybe in total numbers, but five of the six retired jerseys (also the top 6 in this poll) were draft picks.

 

And just looking at the top 40...I would be inclined to say about 50% draft picks, and 50% signings + trades combined.

 

Anyway, yeah, Canucks have wasted a LOT of first round picks.

Scouts use a formula for how they determine whether a player is a bust or not - and for the first round they busted if they didn’t play at least 200 games in the 25-30 overall range (which used to be the second round ...).   1-3 700 games, 4-7 500 games 8-12 400 games etc etc ... a player can still be a bad pick of course but just based on this we sure had a lot of busts.   Second rounders have about a 50% hit rate - the remaining rounds it’s less then 20% you get one roster player combined.   JB is ahead of the game so far (and we can’t really tell for 3 or 4 years)....

  • Vintage 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Voted Tanev; nominate Pettersson.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

   Well it looks like Tanev is taking this one.   Just so you know, upon his retirement Butcher was named by this organization - the 6th greatest player in their own top 50 of greatest Canucks.   THN has him at 38 (and Tanev didn’t make the cut) more recently.   The guy was incredibly tough - gritty- very hard to play against and a master provoker.  He prodigious scorer in juniors he was ranked as a top 3 prospect going into the draft by some and was part of Canada’s first junior gold medal team ...  never translated into the NHL but he was a leader for us and his other teams - with all due respect to Tanev one area he’s hands down ahead of just like his toughness.   Knocked out some folks - the “Strangler” was a feared fighter - but offered a lot more then just enforcing.   I know that a lot of fans never got to watch him play - it was a gut punch when we traded him despite the great haul in return.   Became the Captain in St Louis - not Oats - not Hull etc as I think Biestra pointed out.   Understand the bias towards players you watch over those you weren’t around to watch - or were too young to remember - Butcher is and always will be a great Canuck.  
Also has one of the greatest moments of any Canuck at the time he was traded - that is the game winning goal that got us to game 7 in arguably the best series we’ve ever had that we lost - Vernon is the main reason we didn’t win / that and Otto’s goal being allowed (which bothered Pat Quin until the day he died friends say). 

Played a decade for us ... was a good pick at 10 even though we whiffed on a few players...so.  To this day we haven’t had anyone like him since. 
 

Edit: I’d also like to point out that Calgary had one of the best teams all-time in the mid-late 80’s, the few times EDM slipped they were right there to pick up where they left off...and we almost upset them.  THN has them in the top 20 all-time, ahead of NYR ...

Edited by IBatch
  • Vintage 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.