kingofsurrey Posted February 18, 2016 Author Share Posted February 18, 2016 4 minutes ago, kingofsurrey said: Mogilny did . 1.0 PPG Then i added Messier and Sundin for their leadership . Plus they have 300-800 more pts than hank or danny....... PS both . Great captains don't you know. Hank and Danny are behind all 3 of MO, Sundin and Messier in alltime pts..... PS - hate to remind nucks fans. Messier has 5 stanley cups..... 1900 career pts.... almost Hank and Danny combined LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spotted Zebra Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 1 hour ago, kingofsurrey said: Then i added Messier and Sundin for their leadership . Plus they have 300-800 more pts than hank or danny....... PS both . Great captains don't you know. Hank and Danny are behind all 3 of MO, Sundin and Messier in alltime pts..... PS - hate to remind nucks fans. Messier has 5 stanley cups..... 1900 career pts.... almost Hank and Danny combined LOL More than your top 3 combined. LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingofsurrey Posted February 18, 2016 Author Share Posted February 18, 2016 2 minutes ago, Spotted Zebra said: More than your top 3 combined. LOL Too many posters complained about my original 3 and using points per game.... I switched to all time points... Messier, Sundin and Mogilny....... are the top 3 offensive talents that ever played for the Canucks. Deal with it. LOL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vinnymack Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 7 hours ago, kingofsurrey said: Most talented 3 Canucks all time may be a SURPRISE TO SOME >>>>> If you judge by points per game.... which makes sense. Bure 1.12 pts per game Gradin .90 pts per game Tanti . 89 pts per game Sorry no Hank ( . 83 pts per game ) or Danny.... ( .83 - pts/game ) A few things, that will make you think about your post and not giving the Sedins enough credit. Number One - points were a little easier to come by back than when the older guys played or in that particular Bure era. The reason mainly was because the goalies equipment were much smaller and it was definitely easier to score back than, so with that being said obviously there is going to be more points. Even Gretzky in today's NHL would have no chance of hitting the numbers he did back than and he himself even said it, it's much harder to score today because the goalies are bigger and the players more skilled. Number Two: It took the Sedins a few more seasons to become stars like the ones you mentioned above. They were a bit of late bloomers, but when they bloomed they without a doubt became such a amazing players. Number Three - With all due respect, if you are basing your argument only based on points per game your point is faulty, because there is much more to the game than just that. Unlike any other Canucks in history the Sedins possession time is much higher, their passing is a lot better and the plays they create are just flat out ridiculous sometimes. On top of that they create so much for anyone who plays with them and all the players that play around them, things a lot of the other guys you mentioned didn't do nearly as well. The Sedins make everyone around them look better, some better than they are and they create so many opportunities for their team-mates, more than any of the guys you mentioned in your post. Don't get me wrong all the guys you mentioned are also great players and Bure was one of my favorites of all time, but in all aspects of the game I think the Sedins are more effective based on what they create atogether as far as plays and for other players who play with them, they do it in a way I have never seen any other Canuck player in history do. So with all that being said I don't think points per game aren't legit enough in the point you are trying to make, because there are way two many more factors in hockey that the Sedins offer that other players just cannot and let's be honest likely never will! My list would be Bure, The Sedins, Trevor Linden and Kirk Maclean cause you gotta have a goalie in there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schneider.Man604 Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 On 2/17/2016 at 8:19 PM, kingofsurrey said: Most talented 3 Canucks all time may be a SURPRISE TO SOME >>>>> If you judge by points per game.... which makes sense. Bure 1.12 pts per game Gradin .90 pts per game Tanti . 89 pts per game Sorry no Hank ( . 83 pts per game ) or Danny.... ( .83 - pts/game ) Bure,Naslund, D.Sedin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schneider.Man604 Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 5 hours ago, kingofsurrey said: Then i added Messier and Sundin for their leadership . Plus they have 300-800 more pts than hank or danny....... PS both . Great captains don't you know. Hank and Danny are behind all 3 of MO, Sundin and Messier in alltime pts..... PS - hate to remind nucks fans. Messier has 5 stanley cups..... 1900 career pts.... almost Hank and Danny combined LOL It sucks to hear but this man is right. Too bad we got Messier when he was at the end of his career same with Sundin. All n all we got to watch some stellar hockey in the last 10 years and people shouldn't be complaining why? cause no Canadian team is going to win the cup while $&!#man is in charge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KariyaSakicAnderson Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 9 hours ago, kingofsurrey said: Then i added Messier and Sundin for their leadership . Plus they have 300-800 more pts than hank or danny....... PS both . Great captains don't you know. Hank and Danny are behind all 3 of MO, Sundin and Messier in alltime pts..... PS - hate to remind nucks fans. Messier has 5 stanley cups..... 1900 career pts.... almost Hank and Danny combined LOL You are right Messier was a great Captain and leader, he led to Linden losing his C and being traded, where the Canucks ended up getting a piece to the future WCE. He led to the Canucks dressing room being divided and poisonous, he led the team to their worst season in 20 years and thanks to his leadership that year the Canucks ended up getting both Henrik and Daniel out of it. So you are right, Thank you Messier! without his leadership the Sedins would not be Canucks !!! You are right Henrik is a poor Captain, he never led the team to a Cup final or to several presidents trophies, and neither of the Sedins won a scoring title or picked by their peers as the best player. Both Mats and Mark had done that as Canucks. Btw Messier career +/- is +210, so far Henrik is +223, Daniel is +190 and as you like facts at this point the Sedins have played 800 games less than Messier, by the time they finish their Careers their individual +/- will have blow Messier's out of the water, while having played a LOT less games than Messier had. As you have read my previous post you'd agree that +/- is a great way to judge talent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 On 17/02/2016 at 1:11 PM, Captain Woodget said: How do you factually demonstrate the talent of goaltenders and defensemen under your supposed fool-proof methodology? If Roberto Luongo's PPG pace was only 0.003, does that mean he had less talent than Taylor Pyatt? I find this topic hilarious. If you don't like the Sedins, you could at least attempt to provide better 'facts' than points per game, which are skewed both by era and quality of linemates and competition. Not to mention the sample size, which is much bigger for the Sedins. If Tanti was to play 1,000 games, he'd not have scored at as high a rate. The nosedive in his career after leaving Vancouver is evidence of that. It is also skewed by the years in which the player was here - Tanti played from ages 19-27. The Sedins' PPG for ages 19-27 was 0.64 PPG for Daniel, and 0.63 PPG for Henrik. Think about linemates - Trent Klatt, Artem Chubarov etc. How could they score like that with such poor linemates? With such limited ice time? Lockouts are also excluded here. The Sedins lost a year in a scoring era. You have also conveniently forgotten about playoff PPG. Unsurprisingly, Tanti doesn't feature here: 10pts in 18 games. 0.56 PPG. Daniel's career is 0.70 PPG and Henrik is 0.74 PPG. Again, over a much higher statistical sample. If Pavel Bure played in today's NHL he'd be Tarasenko-esque, which is not quite PPG. Finally, why is talent measured solely by PPG? Why not awards won? Or playoff games won? Or a whole slew of more fitting statistics? Why is PPG such an important and decisive indication of talent? Just in case the OP wants to substantiate his claims at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lastresort318 Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 On February 17, 2016 at 9:28 PM, kingofsurrey said: Would you not agree to judge the most talent Canuck of all time.... to judge by point per game played..... Would that not be a fair judge of Talent.... ?? No it would not be. Different eras, and more then just scoring is important. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingofsurrey Posted February 18, 2016 Author Share Posted February 18, 2016 Lots of amazing talents for the Canucks over the years, thats for sure. I guess there truely is no way to compare talent , skills, or player to player.... Just to have to appreciate who we have been able to have on our teams. Here is my top 10 list then in no particular order - just amazing players. Looked at skill, ppg, career pts, leadership, plus/minus , heart NO COMPARISONS - IN NO ORDER Hank, Danny, Bure, Mogilny, Sundin, Messier, Ohlund , Luongo , Smyl and Naslund. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yes we can nucks Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 2 hours ago, KariyaSakicAnderson said: You are right Messier was a great Captain and leader, he led to Linden losing his C and being traded, where the Canucks ended up getting a piece to the future WCE. He led to the Canucks dressing room being divided and poisonous, he led the team to their worst season in 20 years and thanks to his leadership that year the Canucks ended up getting both Henrik and Daniel out of it. So you are right, Thank you Messier! without his leadership the Sedins would not be Canucks !!! You are right Henrik is a poor Captain, he never led the team to a Cup final or to several presidents trophies, and neither of the Sedins won a scoring title or picked by their peers as the best player. Both Mats and Mark had done that as Canucks. Btw Messier career +/- is +210, so far Henrik is +223, Daniel is +190 and as you like facts at this point the Sedins have played 800 games less than Messier, by the time they finish their Careers their individual +/- will have blow Messier's out of the water, while having played a LOT less games than Messier had. As you have read my previous post you'd agree that +/- is a great way to judge talent. Totally agree. Not to mention Messier played with the greatest player in NHL history in his prime, together with an amazing supporting cast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zimmy Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Most talented right hand = Curt Fraser Most talented chin = Craig Coxe Most talented stink glove = Tim Hunter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheOgRook Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 11 hours ago, kingofsurrey said: Too many posters complained about my original 3 and using points per game.... I switched to all time points... Messier, Sundin and Mogilny....... are the top 3 offensive talents that ever played for the Canucks. Deal with it. LOL. What he's saying is too may posters on here made him look silly so he's grasping at straws to salvage what's left of his dignity.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingofsurrey Posted February 18, 2016 Author Share Posted February 18, 2016 5 hours ago, TheOgRook said: What he's saying is too may posters on here made him look silly so he's grasping at straws to salvage what's left of his dignity.. Face the facts. When looking at the TOP 3 most offensively talent players to ever play for the canucks. If you go by points per game it is not Hank or Danny - it is Bure , Gradin, Tanti If you go by career points it is not Hank or Danny. - it is Messier, Sundin and Mogilny, Sedins would be Top 5-6 by either criteria. Both are future HOF players . Amazing careers . But not the 3 offensive players that ever played for the Canucks. The stats could point to Hank and Danny being the top 2 players though if you go by plus/minus career. Amazing plus/minus stats over their career for both Hank and Danny. PS - OGrock is the poster that keeps saying that worse players drafted are the way to win a cup. LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
131313 Posted February 19, 2016 Share Posted February 19, 2016 Messier was never a Canuck. He was a New York Ranger plant sent to destroy the Canucks. He very nearly managed to do just that with the help of his buddy Keenan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.