Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Enter Search Term. Use arrows to navigate between autocomplete results. If no results appear, use Enter to do a full site search.
Forum Closure ×
Canucks Community
Forum Closure

Mark Messier believes he's still owed money from his days with the Canucks

R.Luongo.1

By R.Luongo.1
in Canucks Talk

Recommended Posts

Wolfhard Junior Prospect

Wolfhard

Posted
Posted

Nope when he was here.

1997-98 60 points - second in scoring to Bure (90 points) and 15 points ahead of Mogilny at #3.

1998-99 48 points in 59 games - second in scoring to Markus Naslund (66 points in 80 games) and ahead of Mogilny in third (45 points in 59 games)

1999-00 54 points in 66 games - third behind Naslund (65 points in 82 games) and Cassels (62 points in 79 games)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Wetcoaster Canucks First-Line

Wetcoaster

Posted
Posted

97-98 you fail to mention Mogilny had 45 points in 51 games. Far better than Messier. 22 goals and 60 points is pretty pathetic after years of 36g, 84p in 11 less games the previous year. And 47g, 99p in 8 less, the year before. Considering his linemates got BETTER yet his production dropped drastically.

98-99 Messier finished tied for 6th in goals...with 3rd liner, Dave Scatchard. He was expected to actually lead the team in Bure's absence, but died off even more, and it was Naslund who stepped up. 13 goals for the Canucks, 3 seasons removed from 47g for the Rangers. You think we got our 6 mil worth?

99-00 He stepped it up and sniped all of 17 goals. You can tell he was trying to get some points in his final year, so he could demand more money for his next contract outside of Vancouver. It was evident by his team worst, -15.

He then went back to New York, scoring 24 goals, and 67 points. His best totals since he LEFT New York.

You can also look at his penalty minutes. Not the ideal stat, but a guy like Messier played rough and tough when it counted. His PIM's in Vancouver were 1/3 of his career average. Big, mean Messier, with 58, 33, and 30 PIM's. You'd think he was after the Byng or something.

Fact is, his heart was never in Vancouver. Messier believed his own hype, and thought he'd be worshiped here, like he was in NY. But when he was actually held accountable, and received backlash for some of the choices he made, (Demanding #11 got him off to a bad start, followed by hanging Trevor out to dry over the captaincy), he got all butthurt, and just played out his time here, so he could go back to a city where he could have his godlike status, from fans who love a team cuz they're told to. He may have signed here with good intentions, honestly believing he could help the team. But it really seemed like he quit on this team pretty quickly when he became the most hated player on the team. The only place he was visible was in interviews after losses, as you barely noticed him on the ice, even though he led all forwards in ice time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
-Vintage Canuck- Canucks Hall-of-Famer

-Vintage Canuck-

Posted
Posted

The fact remains - Messier finished second twice and third in team scoring during his three years in Vancouver. That is a fact.

It is your opinion "his heart was never in Vancouver".

If Ovechkin had not been hurt Henrik would not have won the Art Ross or Hart, right?

If Crosby had not been hurt Daniel would never have won the Art Ross or Lindsay, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Wolfhard Junior Prospect

Wolfhard

Posted
Posted

The fact remains - Messier finished second twice and third in team scoring during his three years in Vancouver. That is a fact.

It is your opinion "his heart was never in Vancouver".

If Ovechkin had not been hurt Henrik would not have won the Art Ross or Hart, right?

If Crosby had not been hurt Daniel would never have won the Art Ross or Lindsay, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bertuzzi Babe Canucks Second-Line

Bertuzzi Babe

Posted
Posted

I guess it's not hard to finish 2nd or 3rd in POINTS on a team that trades away Bure, Linden, Gelinas etc...

But the fact also remains that his goalscoring production was reduced by 60% when he came here, and overall points by about 40%. I don't know how you can argue that he was successful here. Not to mention the fact that stats aside, he was a major player in the entire heart being ripped out of this team. A heart that he didn't replace. And soon thereafter led us to one of our worst seasons in history, before leaving us with a team that had about 3 good players, and a cast of has-been's and never-will-be's. Not exactly what we were going for when we signed him. And before you say that was all Keenan's work, we all know Messier was as involved in management of the team as Keenan was. That's part of the reason he was never accepted in the locker room.

Messier was an overrated joke. And the ownership deserve to be out millions after they bought into his hype and overpaid his sorry ass. Goes to show why intelligent hockey people should be making choices. Not overzealous owners who figure "Oh, people say he's the reason the Rangers won. Lets get him!" Pretty much all of the horrible moves made back then, were made by ownership over Pat Quinn's head, until he was replaced by Keenan, which just made things spiral even worse.

The only positive thing I can say; Thank you Mike Keenan and Mark Messier. If not for your completely disgusting performances, our team wouldn't have sucked enough to put us in the position to pick up the Sedins.

Edit: there's also a reason that nobody on that team ever had anything nice to say about Messier OR Keenan. Actually Naslund didn't mind Keenan. He was Keenan's little pet project. Other than that most players zip their mouths when asked about either of them, or, a select few, like Gino, tell it how it is. And Gino's own words said, "Messier didn't break a sweat for Vancouver until 'his' guys were brought in". Messier also took pot shots at Quinn and Linden with some of his statements, making them scapegoats for the losing, even though, when they were gone, the losing got worse.

Messier was nothing that that the hype said he was. And after he exposed his true colours in Vancouver, the "greatest leader in sports", never saw the playoffs again for the final 7 years of his career.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bertuzzi Babe Canucks Second-Line

Bertuzzi Babe

Posted
Posted

Except this has nothing to do with Messier's right to enforce his contract.

And the fact is he was twice second in scoring on the team and third once. Many fans seems to have not noted that fact. He was obviously not surrounded with a strong team but that is another issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Wolfhard Junior Prospect

Wolfhard

Posted
Posted

Except this has nothing to do with Messier's right to enforce his contract.

And the fact is he was twice second in scoring on the team and third once. Many fans seems to have not noted that fact. He was obviously not surrounded with a strong team but that is another issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Wetcoaster Canucks First-Line

Wetcoaster

Posted
Posted

Oh, I get it. It wasn't Messier, it was everyone else. He was a captain that can blame the whole rest of the team for failing, in spite of all he did. Like help the TRUE leadership of our team out of town, so HE could be the man. Almost seems like that was his main goal, if you ask me.

Remember... You weren't the only person watching back then. Your opinions, are but opinions. And they're not the commonly accepted facts of the time. So either you're privy to information that the rest of the public is not (if so, feel free to share), or you simply like having a different opinion to argue about, so you can feel superior.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...