Top 50 Canucks of All-Time - #50 - Tie-Breaker

[Kevin Biestra]

30 minutes ago, Baratheon said:

I understand the Matt Cooke games played argument.  However for me that just doesn't hold enough weight when comparing these two players.  Brock Boeser lead the team in goals and points in his rookie year.  He immediately became a first line player and stayed there.  I can't imagine that we would have had any trouble replacing Matt Cooke if he hadn't been on the team for whatever reason.  If Brock Boeser hadn't been on the team then the difference would be dramatic.  That makes it clear to me who left a bigger impact.

 

For me the weird thing is seeing Cooke voted in when Sandlak isn't on the nominations list yet.  That is kind of the clearest example of recency working in someone's favor.  Cooke had his 2004 playoff performance, but Sandlak had playoff heroics of his own in 1992.  A substantial role in easily the most definitive and dominant comeback from down 3-1 in a series in NHL history vs. Winnipeg.

 

For what it's worth, I have both players outside the top 50 but comfortably in the top 80 at the very worst.

Edited May 15, 2020 by Kevin Biestra

[Coconuts]

11 minutes ago, Kevin Biestra said:

 

For me the weird thing is seeing Cooke voted in when Sandlak isn't on the nominations list yet.  That is kind of the clearest example of recency working in someone's favor.  Cooke had his 2004 playoff performance, but Sandlak had playoff heroics of his own in 1992.

 

For what it's worth, I have both players outside the top 50 but comfortably in the top 80 at the very worst.

I had Sandlak and Cooke both ahead of Lanz and Fraser, Sandlak had nomination support but I think what's kept him out is the diversity of nominations that began to pop up as the list got closer to the end. It's a shame, because Sandlak was tough as nails, had respectable production and is one of just 26 players to have played 500 regular season games for us. 

Edited May 15, 2020 by Coconuts

[Baratheon]

5 minutes ago, Kevin Biestra said:

 

For me the weird thing is seeing Cooke voted in when Sandlak isn't on the nominations list yet.  That is kind of the clearest example of recency working in someone's favor.  Cooke had his 2004 playoff performance, but Sandlak had playoff heroics of his own in 1992.  A big part of easily the most definitive and dominant comeback from down 3-1 in a series in NHL history vs. Winnipeg.

 

For what it's worth, I have both players outside the top 50 but comfortably in the top 80 at the very worst.

Agreed but since it has come down to a tie-breaker, I tried to compare the 2 directly.  Cookes nomination I think was definitely recency bias.  The vote can't be recency though because Boeser is the more recent.  I'm guessing Cooke provides childhood memories for some that Brock does not.  

[Baratheon]

4 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

I had Sandlak and Cooke both ahead of Lanz and Fraser, Sandlak had nomination support but I think what's kept him out is the diversity of nominations that began to pop up as the list got closer to the end. It's a shame, because Sandlak was tough as nails and one of just 26 players to have played 500 games for us. 

I am curious.  Would you look at this differently if this was an all-time NHL player list rather than a Canuck one?  For example.  Would you have Zdeno Chara ranked above Bobby Orr?  Chara has played nearly 900 more games than Bobby.  In fact Chara has played almost 400 more in Boston alone.

[Coconuts]

12 minutes ago, Baratheon said:

I am curious.  Would you look at this differently if this was an all-time NHL player list rather than a Canuck one?  For example.  Would you have Zdeno Chara ranked above Bobby Orr?  Chara has played nearly 900 more games than Bobby.  In fact Chara has played almost 400 more in Boston alone.

It'd vary from player to player comparison. Chara vs Bobby Orr isn't a great comparison because Bobby Orr is one of the few players in league history who revolutionized how a position was played. Yes, Chara has the longevity on his side but how many players can you say truly revolutionized a position? It's a very, very small list. 

 

I've been vocal about games played mattering to me, but not once have I said it's all I look at. Though I'm not implying that you said it was. 

Edited May 15, 2020 by Coconuts

[Dumb Nuck]

Don’t forget a tie only happened because people pulled their votes to vote for Brock due to their hatred of Cooke, Cooke actually got quite a few more legitimate votes. As I said before, if Larionov was in Cookes place with votes he would have won as the vote stacking would not have happened. For this reason I find this result sad, and bogus. 

Edited May 15, 2020 by Dumb Nuck

[Baratheon]

3 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

It'd vary from player to player comparison. Chara vs Bobby Orr isn't a great comparison because Bobby Orr is one of the few players in league history who revolutionized how a position was played. Yes, Chara has the longevity on his side but how many players can you say truly revolutionized a position? It's a very, very small list. 

 

I've been vocal about games played mattering to me, but not once have I said it's all I look at. Though I'm not implying that you said it was. 

That's fair and a good way of putting it.  I think I am putting a lot of stock in Brock leading the team in scoring in his rookie year.  That's pretty rare on any team.  It looks less cool because Petey shows up right afterwards and also does it lol.  

 

I just think the Canucks would be in awful shape without Brock.  I don't think the Canucks would have been too bad off had they lost Cooke for whatever reason.  

[Baratheon]

4 minutes ago, Dumb Nuck said:

Don’t forget a tie only happened because people pulled their votes to vote for Brock due to their hatred of Cooke, Cooke actually got quite a few more legitimate votes. As I said before, if Larionov was in Cookes place with votes he would have won as the vote stacking would not have happened. For this reason I find this result sad, and bogus. 

I doubt anybody voted Brock because they "hated Cooke" lol.  Anyone who voted for Brock did so because they have him ranked ahead of Cooke.  If they had to pull their vote from someone else, that's because they had BOTH guys ranked ahead of Cooke.

[-Vintage Canuck-]

Too early to say for Boeser. Went with Cooke.

[IBatch]

38 minutes ago, Dumb Nuck said:

Don’t forget a tie only happened because people pulled their votes to vote for Brock due to their hatred of Cooke, Cooke actually got quite a few more legitimate votes. As I said before, if Larionov was in Cookes place with votes he would have won as the vote stacking would not have happened. For this reason I find this result sad, and bogus. 

I pulled my vote - not because I hate Cooke because I do not -  but because I believe BB is more deserving simple as that.   I also did it earlier to help a few players get in before others whom I felt were more deserving.  The problem lies in the simple fact that I was motivated to do that in first place.   If he wasn’t a voting option then this would have never happened.   I would be happy to vote for Cooke in the 60-70’s where I feel he should be, given his 187ish PGP thats about right but only because of games  played.  But won’t have to because by default he will be the 51st greatest Canuck.

 

If we were simply going by games played then where is Sandlak and where is Murzyn?   Everyone loves Tanev because he’s recent - very little love  at all for Murzyn who drops the gloves and kept Lumme roaming for longer then any other league wide pairing in the 90’s.   He was the epitome of selflessness - and often wore the A too.  So yeah I’m bitter about that - but I’m not taking it out on Cooke - also have Gelinas, Momesso, Aucoin, Pederson, Larionov etc etc ranked ahead of him including BB.  EPs in at 45...so why not BB too?

Edited May 15, 2020 by IBatch

[Coconuts]

37 minutes ago, Baratheon said:

That's fair and a good way of putting it.  I think I am putting a lot of stock in Brock leading the team in scoring in his rookie year.  That's pretty rare on any team.  It looks less cool because Petey shows up right afterwards and also does it lol.  

 

I just think the Canucks would be in awful shape without Brock.  I don't think the Canucks would have been too bad off had they lost Cooke for whatever reason.  

I agree with everything you've said, Brock's a helluva player and we'd be in tough without him. Bottom six players are easier to find. 

 

That being said, given the current numbers I still have Cooke ahead of him. If Boeser had maybe even one more season with closer to 72-82 games played it might shift things for me, but as it stands almost 400 games difference is too much of a gap. One can point at Boeser's numbers and his immediate impact on the team, but it's hard to argue that Cooke didn't have a positive impact during those 400 additional games because impact goes beyond production. 

 

I understand why you'd go with Boeser, we just see and value things differently. 

Edited May 15, 2020 by Coconuts

[apollo]

Again just like to add... really dont mean to bash Brock... I'd have him higher than Petey as well on this list. Long gevity + more kind hearted

 

Aside from being here for 2 extra seasons... yes I'm counting his 9 games first year - he's just a better guy off the ice. Not that Petey isn't amazing as well - he's done his fair share of volunteering already. There's not many guys in the NHL that are better guys off the ice than Brock.

 

Kid was raised humble and loves to give back. He's not a show off on his social media either... he's not a meth head either that pays $1300 for a hoodie that costs $30 to manufacture. He knows he's a freakin Brockstar deep down and doesn't like to "flex" as our toxic society likes to these days...

 

 

So kudos to Brock for cracking the top 50. Even the Sedins weren't such kind hearted people at Brocks age... he was what 19 or 20 when he took that girl to prom? He's always been present at the hospitals too.

 

Brock is the epitome of what it means to be a great Canuck.

 

 

[Baratheon]

This will all be a moot point in a couple of years when we win the cup and launch Bo, Brock, Petey and Hughes to the top of this list.

[Gurn]

Write in vote for Curt Fraser.

[Baratheon]

2 minutes ago, gurn said:

Write in vote for Curt Fraser.

Fraser got voted in at 49 but if he wants to be on the list twice I'm certainly not going to argue with him!

[Gurn]

17 minutes ago, Baratheon said:

Fraser got voted in at 49 but if he wants to be on the list twice I'm certainly not going to argue with him!

Well in that case I'll vote for Brock.

[BarnBurner]

I voted Boeser.

[Timbermen]

Vote Boeser

Nominate Bohonos

[IBatch]

2 hours ago, apollo said:

Again just like to add... really dont mean to bash Brock... I'd have him higher than Petey as well on this list. Long gevity + more kind hearted

 

Aside from being here for 2 extra seasons... yes I'm counting his 9 games first year - he's just a better guy off the ice. Not that Petey isn't amazing as well - he's done his fair share of volunteering already. There's not many guys in the NHL that are better guys off the ice than Brock.

 

Kid was raised humble and loves to give back. He's not a show off on his social media either... he's not a meth head either that pays $1300 for a hoodie that costs $30 to manufacture. He knows he's a freakin Brockstar deep down and doesn't like to "flex" as our toxic society likes to these days...

 

 

So kudos to Brock for cracking the top 50. Even the Sedins weren't such kind hearted people at Brocks age... he was what 19 or 20 when he took that girl to prom? He's always been present at the hospitals too.

 

Brock is the epitome of what it means to be a great Canuck.

 

 

Well said Apollo - Brock was certainly raised right.  Class act and mature beyond this years. I’m rooting for him to come out when this is over and earn every penny of his contract and think he will. 

[Kevin Biestra]

9 hours ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

Brock’s hair alone qualifies him as Great. 

 

Brock >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Messier.