Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Patel Bure

Members
  • Posts

    3,904
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Patel Bure

  1. Fair enough. Translating it into a “realistic” scenario however (and yes, I realize the absurdity of using the term ‘realistic’ here), would the Canucks be able to roll out something like... Mogilny-Larionov-Bure Sedin-Sedin-Burrows Naslund-Morrison-Bertuzzi Miller-Kesler-Linden Without Atleast one of these lines feeling shortchanged in terms of ice-time / PP time / offensive deployment, etc. In a simulated realistic environment, the impression that I’d get is that you’d have a lot of these guys fighting for ice-time which could adversely effect team chemistry. Who would get shafted on the Power Play? Who would be forced into playing more Pk minutes outside of Miller, Kesler, and Linden in this case? If this was a “one off” or a mini tournament of some kind, then I could see the above working, but I’m just not sure about a full season.
  2. Would Kesler have the hands necessary to play with them? Kesler’s abilities to maximize his teammates is a little weak. Is international hockey of a similar level to the NHL? I’m not entirely sure. Bure and Mogilny might be able to get away playing with one another on bigger ice and against inferior competition, but would that translate to the NHL? None of our coaches felt comfortable playing them with one another while they were here and so perhaps there’s a reason for that?
  3. Haha no not trolling. Just don’t know how or where to slot him in. I’m going to attempt this again. Many people have Bure playing with the twins but that’s a terrible stylistic match since the twins are cyclers while Bure needs someone that can play give and go. Many people have also slotted Mogilny and Bure together but that would be a defensive train wreck. You could do something like Miller-Ronning-Bure, but then do you go with three scoring lines and no shut down line? (Assuming that a version of the WCE is on one line while the twins would anchor another). Would a guy like Bure be happy sharing offensive deployment with two other lines? Those are some of the thoughts going through my head. ps - if I wanted to roll four lines and not have any clear cut ‘match ups’ line, then I’d probably do something like this: Miller-Ronning-Bure Burrows-Horvat-Mogilny Sedin-Sedin-Linden Naslund-Kesler-Bertuzzi Hughes-Tanev Jovanovski-Lidster Ohlund-Salo Luongo McLean Realistically though, I don’t know how the above lines and above players would feel about getting reduced offensive deployment. Something would have to give and some of those above players would end up being extremely unhappy. If I was building an actual “team” however, maybe I’d do something like this: Sedin-Sedin-Burrows Naslund-Morrison-Bertuzzi Miller-Kesler-Linden Burrows-Horvat-Hansen Brashear Jovanovski-Tanev Hughes-Lidster Mitchel-Salo Edler Luongo McLean
  4. Revisions. possibly more revisions to come.
  5. Post your all-time Canucks line-up We had a similar type thread over a year ago but I figure enough time has elapsed that we can create a new thread. Create a 22 man roster with the best Canucks team possible. Choose your coach and GM as well. 1) You can pick any Canuck player from any era and put him in your line-up. 2) Ideally, the Canuck players that you choose will have experienced at least one year of their “prime” hockey in a Canucks uniform. So for example, guys like Messier, Sundin, Neely, Peca, Tikanen, and Barry Pederson might not be ideal picks since they didn’t play their peak hockey while in a Canucks uniform. Guys like Larionov and Mogilny however, might make the cut because they played at least one season here where they played at or close to their prime as a Canuck. However, the choice is yours. 3) Remember, you are building a TEAM. You may not want to simply ice an all-star line-up. Maybe you want guys that can also kill penalties, are good shut down guys, are good in the dressing room, etc. As far as line combinations go, you might want to ice line combos together that would be a good stylistic fit. For example - a line of Naslund-Horvat-Bure would be terrific offensively, but would it be a liability defensively? So, without further adieu, here is my team: Naslund-Linden-Bertuzzi: Linden brings a solid two way game and enough offensive creativity and defensive prowess to be a good fit for this line. Sedin-Sedin-Miller: I actually really like Miller with the twins. He basically brings everything that Burrows did/does, but adds a little more size to the line. Miller probably has a bit more offensive skill as well, and can also take key face offs. Miller also has the smarts and the defensive game. Burrows-Kesler-Bure: This line combination will definitely raise some eyebrows but here’s my thought: This line would actually be a shut down line, but would MURDER other teams on the break-out. Short break out passes, and then boom.......off to the races down the ice whether that’s Kesler leading the break out or Bure. This line will also have enough defensive prowess on it if the Canucks desired to have Bure cheat a little. Adams-Horvat-Smyl: I like Greg Adams on this line (as opposed to Tanti) because I think Adams brings a bit more defensively (although I might be wrong here). Mogilny: I like Mogilny as the 13th man as he can play both wings in almost any role on any line. This will come in handy if injuries occur. Ohlund-Jovanovski Reinhart-Edler Mitchell-Salo Lumme Luongo McLean Our most clutch goalie of all-time helps bail out our statistically best goalie of all-time if he experiences big game pressure yips.
  6. Prime Dominik Hasek is by far the best goalie that I’ve ever seen play the game.
  7. I went with McDavid’s speed, but only under the assumption that my other skills (I.e. shot + hands) are fairly decent.
  8. This is a VERY tough poll but I went with Forsberg. Although Lidstrom is one of the greatest defensemen of all-time, peak Forsberg is up there with the all-time greats in my opinion. Even though Forsberg's peak was relatively short (largely due to injuries), he dominated the game like almost none other for a short while there. Lidstrom probably deserves to win this poll, but peak Forsberg was something else. I put peak Forsberg in the same category as Gretzky, Lemieux, Crosby, and McDavid.
  9. I am happy for Mr. Benn and wish him well in the continuation of his NHL career.
  10. “Did somebody say Linden Vey? :naughty: “ ~ Willie Desjardins
  11. I’ll have to go with Modano. Fantastic leader that brought it on both ends of the rink. Excellent skater for his size as well.
  12. Meh. Whatever. I liked it when Prust speared Marchand in the groin way back when and so he’s good in my books.
  13. Agreed. I’ve always maintained that Boeser is a better fit with Horvat than Pettersson. I’d rather see Garland play with Petey and Miller.
  14. Miller-Pettersson-Boeser Pearson-Horvat-Garland Hoglander-Dickinson-Podkolzin Motte-Sutter-Highmore OEL-Hamonic Hughes-Poolman Juolevi-Myers Demko Halak Is what I think will happen.
  15. Only Canucks-NJ trade that I would consider is.... Hughes + Myers to NJ for Graves, Severson, and a 1st.
  16. For me, it's the 1993-1996 version of Sergei Fedorov. One of the best two way players to ever play the game and skated like a gazelle out there. Skills and hockey IQ beyond belief. Fedorov reminded me of Alex Mogilny, in the sense that he could be the best player in the world when he absolutely felt like it. For me it's Fedorov hands down.
  17. Perhaps you’re right but I seem to recall players not training much in the Summer during the 80’s. Training camp was basically the time in which players slowly got back into shape. I feel like an increased emphasis on training and off season regimen’s didn’t start to really kick in until the early mid 90’s. I could be wrong though.
  18. Probably Miller since players in the modern era are in far better physical shape than players of Tanti’s era. In terms of overall Canucks legacy however, Tanti is the clear cut winner.
  19. For right now, it’s Tanti based on tenure. However, I’d go with Miller if Miller can duplicate his performance as a Canucks over these next few years and beyond.
  20. What you described is basically Conor Garland and/or Podkolzin. Dickinson is a very good defensive player and has good size, but isn’t the greatest on face-offs.
  21. That’s a good question. I’d probably still stick with the plan (ie Rathbone in Abby + filling in for QH or OEL when injuries occur), and then re-assess things at the end of the season or even the draft. Hell, maybe even as early as the trade deadline if Rathbone is absolutely smoking it. I don’t think OEL would fetch us much (if he’s even moveable) due to his term+money, but I’d start fielding offers on Hughes. Maybe a Quinn Hughes for Moritz Seider or Noah Dobson type deal if Rathbone is absolutely lights out.
  22. Excellent points as usual mll. Green Bay really intrigues me for some reason. Outside of the NFL, the NHL would be their biggest pro sport in town. Green Bay is definitely a city in which its fans gets bat$&!# crazy behind if the NFL is of any indication.
  23. Agreed with this. I’m just wondering as to what would be better for Rathbone’s development for this season? Option A: Play on the Canucks on the 3rd pairing with limited offensive deployment. Play on the Canucks’ 2nd PP unit. Option B: Log huge minutes in Abbotsford and be counted on to the be #1 guy on the team. Get ample amounts of PP time + tons of offensive deployment which complements his game. Get called up to the NHL for frequent stints to play on the 2nd pairing just in case one of Hughes or OEL is injured. Personally? I think option B is the far better option. Using option B would also allow the Canucks to see what they have in Olli Juolevi at the NHL level. Rathbone being up here right from the get go would likely mean OJ sitting in the press box. Unless Rathbone proves that he is significantly better than OJ at camp, I think it would be best for OJ to have that 3rd pairing spot on opening night playing alongside Tyler Myers.
  24. I don’t know the Mississauga area that well but what about those guys? They are a rabid hockey market and ignoring metropolitan areas, the city actually has more people than both Vancouver and Winnipeg. I’m also thinking about another Northern California area such as San Francisco, Sacramento, or Oakland. Cross town rival of San Jose + players already love Cali.
  25. Relocation to Minneopolis? Wondering if it would be possible to..... 1) Change the name of “Minnesota Wild” to St.Paul Wild. 2) Relocate the Coyotes to Minneopolis and have another Minnesota-based hockey franchise there. Reasoning being this: 1) The state of Minnesota is a hockey hotbed 2) You can get a real hockey rivalry between Minneopolis and St.Paul.
×
×
  • Create New...