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

[Discussion] What Former or current Canucks numbers get retired?


ItsMillerTime

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, 10TRAVIS NUCK10 said:

Ya I dunno I think Luongo is a no brainer. This franchises best goalie ever ..........youd have to be a pretty lousy franchise not to recognize that

He didn't really achieve much that McLean didn't.  McLean was a Vezina finalist twice and also got to Game 7 of the Stanley Cup final, setting some NHL records along the way.

 

McLean was considered the 2nd best goalie in the NHL by many over about a five-year stretch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Rick_theRyper said:

Lol no cup banners one presidents choice banner..lol and soon to be 20 retired numbers lmao. Yikes! I agree no more after sedins till we winn a freaking cup. An exception for Bo if he stays here his whole career and we still dont have one.. No one likes 53 other than him anyways! 

President's choice? Shopping at Superstore are we?

TWO President's trophies.

 

Frankly I'm not for retiring numbers. I love the tribute concept of young players paying homage to their idols. That being said, there should be a few, league wide, like for Gretz and Howe. Jagr's number should definitely be retired league wide.

As far as team retirement, that should be reserved for tragedies or hockey legends. Agree with Bourdon and Rypien and think on the Canucks only Linden (and probaby Sedins) are worth even arguing about. A debate could be had for Lu but next year he'll have played more seasons in FLA than VAN, so I'm inclined to let him go. He was integral and our captain for a time, but lots of players are captains for a time and heart and soul guys.

If a guy like Messier only has his number retired by one team then even Crosby and Teows are questionable league wide and to me that says we should be hesitant about retiring numbers at all.

I'm good with retiring 22 and 33 when they do, but otherwise... It's gotta be spectacular.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Kevin Biestra said:

He didn't really achieve much that McLean didn't.  McLean was a Vezina finalist twice and also got to Game 7 of the Stanley Cup final, setting some NHL records along the way.

 

McLean was considered the 2nd best goalie in the NHL by many over about a five-year stretch.

Yeah and Corey saved our bacon where as mclean was the man if the #1 goes up it better be his! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, McIlhargey the Lesser said:

President's choice? Shopping at Superstore are we?

TWO President's trophies.

 

Frankly I'm not for retiring numbers. I love the tribute concept of young players paying homage to their idols. That being said, there should be a few, league wide, like for Gretz and Howe. Jagr's number should definitely be retired league wide.

As far as team retirement, that should be reserved for tragedies or hockey legends. Agree with Bourdon and Rypien and think on the Canucks only Linden (and probaby Sedins) are worth even arguing about. A debate could be had for Lu but next year he'll have played more seasons in FLA than VAN, so I'm inclined to let him go. He was integral and our captain for a time, but lots of players are captains for a time and heart and soul guys.

If a guy like Messier only has his number retired by one team then even Crosby and Teows are questionable league wide and to me that says we should be hesitant about retiring numbers at all.

I'm good with retiring 22 and 33 when they do, but otherwise... It's gotta be spectacular.

And no Extra Foods actually lol. Forgot it was 2 though good catch! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, McIlhargey the Lesser said:

President's choice? Shopping at Superstore are we?

TWO President's trophies.

 

Frankly I'm not for retiring numbers. I love the tribute concept of young players paying homage to their idols. That being said, there should be a few, league wide, like for Gretz and Howe. Jagr's number should definitely be retired league wide.

As far as team retirement, that should be reserved for tragedies or hockey legends. Agree with Bourdon and Rypien and think on the Canucks only Linden (and probaby Sedins) are worth even arguing about. A debate could be had for Lu but next year he'll have played more seasons in FLA than VAN, so I'm inclined to let him go. He was integral and our captain for a time, but lots of players are captains for a time and heart and soul guys.

If a guy like Messier only has his number retired by one team then even Crosby and Teows are questionable league wide and to me that says we should be hesitant about retiring numbers at all.

I'm good with retiring 22 and 33 when they do, but otherwise... It's gotta be spectacular.

You think too many numbers are retired, yet you want Jagr retired league wide?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, captainhorvat said:

22 and 33 retired

14/roh

Kesler/ aint getting sh*t

Bieksa and salo/ roh

 If the most overrated canucks goalie ever kirk mclean can get it then lui ring of honor for sure.

 

I hate Kesler with a passion and he used to be my favorite Canuck. To say he ain't getting $&!# is a bit absurd. If it wasn't for him we wouldn't have made it past the preds. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, McHortanen said:

I hate Kesler with a passion and he used to be my favorite Canuck. To say he ain't getting $&!# is a bit absurd. If it wasn't for him we wouldn't have made it past the preds. 

Guaranteed kesler will not get ring of honor. And i dont even hate kesler still like the guy as a player. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, captainhorvat said:

Guaranteed kesler will not get ring of honor. And i dont even hate kesler still like the guy as a player. 

I meant on a more deserving level. I doubt he would get it but he does deserve it for how much he helped us almost capture our first cup. If he wasn't playing hurt in the finals we would have won the cup

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, McHortanen said:

I meant on a more deserving level. I doubt he would get it but he does deserve it for how much he helped us almost capture our first cup. If he wasn't playing hurt in the finals we would have won the cup

I dont think he deserves ring of honor for ALMOST helping us win the cup. And i disagree, i think if we still had hammer then we would have won the cup.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, McHortanen said:

I hate Kesler with a passion and he used to be my favorite Canuck. To say he ain't getting $&!# is a bit absurd. If it wasn't for him we wouldn't have made it past the preds. 

He was a beast in that series and also for a number of years, but I think the main reason he won't be getting a ROH is that players need to show that "heart of a Canuck" trait. Which he did have up until the end of 2011, but no heart anymore after that. Then of course the selfishness of his team trade limits and such, etc etc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, 10TRAVIS NUCK10 said:

Ya I dunno I think Luongo is a no brainer. This franchises best goalie ever ..........youd have to be a pretty lousy franchise not to recognize that

THIS!

 

I was so torqued off one day in Willie's first season when this very topic came up for discussion on TSN 1040. The consensus was that he wasn't deserving of having his jersey lifted to the rafters and number retired. 

 

Im hesitant to list his Canuck career accomplishments since anyone who is able can simply look them up themselves. But, when you look at whose name is atop all the pertinent categories at that position for the franchise...

 

I recall TSN arguing that 2 of the main reasons they opted for Luongo the the RoH rather than the rafters was because he never won an individual award and - I'm not making this one up - he didn't play here long enough(?!). Not long enough, eh? Yet, it took him 152 games LESS than McLean played to overtake him in franchise wins. And, let's not forget that, for a time, this guy was pretty much the only thing on this team worth talking about and carried this franchise prior to the twins full maturation. 

 

I get that he never led he Canucks to the Stanley Cup, but, last time I checked, neither had the Sedins. We're talking about a guy who, like the twins, might end up in the HHoF. What more must the guy have done while he was here?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, captainhorvat said:

I dont think he deserves ring of honor for ALMOST helping us win the cup. And i disagree, i think if we still had hammer then we would have won the cup.

With regards to the 2011 SCF, I would argue that if Mikael Samuelsson had been available and healthy, he'd likely have had a far better impact on the outcome of that series than Hamhuis. Particularly in light of the team's scoring troubles. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Screw said:

Again, not after he spit in the face of the Canucks and their fans by demanding a trade and sitting out until it went through.

So because you got butthurt, we should just ignore what he did FOR the team? Come on man, even Pete Rose has his number retired by the Reds and he actually did something pretty bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 08/07/2016 at 3:38 PM, roland said:

He was a beast in that series and also for a number of years, but I think the main reason he won't be getting a ROH is that players need to show that "heart of a Canuck" trait. Which he did have up until the end of 2011, but no heart anymore after that. Then of course the selfishness of his team trade limits and such, etc etc

Selfishness? He wants to win a cup before he leaves. That's why he was so beast during that series. That's why he successfully shutdown Toews and Thornton that year. That's he had man tears when we lost in game 7. Without him we don't have 2011 and would be out in the first round. 

 

But in terms of this thread Sedins are locks. Everyone else maybe ring of honour for the best. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Luongo should get ROH, no questions asked. But I don't think he should get his number raised. Luongo was the best goalie we ever had, no question there, but as mentioned above, he didn't really accomplish much. Him and Cory have the Jennings trophy, and he broke Kirk's records. But Kirk played on worse teams in a slightly higher scoring era. Maclean was also known for being THE backbone of the 94 team, and carried them on his back. Luongo, on the other hand, was known for his playoff meltdowns, especially for the cup final. (to be fair, the team didn't help at all.) Both had Vezina nominations, so that's a washout. If Luongo had played longer for us, and had more success, I'd be okay with retiring his number. But I think at this point in time, he should get the ROH. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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