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

Was 2010-2011 a successful season?


Nucks89

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, Tiger-Hearted said:

The 2011 run was exciting but the '11 team was my least favourite Canucks Cup finalist. Totally agree Nucks89. Luongo couldn't even shut the door on Toews who tied Game 7 shorthanded with little time remaining. Burrows the Dragon Slayer saved Luongo's butt by scoring in OT. And considering the Canucks were up 3-0 in the series. 

 

The '82 team was missing team captain and defense leader Kevin McCarthy and the Canucks still dominated. Sure, the Oilers' early exit helped but the Canucks were 11-2 going into the finals. If it weren't for bad luck and bounces, they could've come home up 2-0 in the finals against a powerhouse Islanders team. Everyone played at the top of their game. Steamer, Gradin, Boldirev, Lars Molin, Tiger, Harold and of course, King Richard. 

 

The '94 team was really an underachieving contender in the regular season that finally found their groove after being down 3-1 to Calgary. The leadership of Linden, the clutch goalscoring of Bure, Courtnall and Adams and the best playoff goalie in Canucks history, Captain Kirk. Should have beaten the Rangers in six. Bad biased officiating and Bure missing the penalty shot in Game 4 cost the Canucks the Cup. 

The '82 team had the path to the finals cleared for them. They were 4th in the west and never played a higher ranked team until the finals. LA upset 1st place Edmonton (the heavy favorite) and Chicago upset both the 2nd and 3rd place teams. The Canucks played 5th, 8th and 6th to attain the finals. Not exactly daunting.

 

The '94 team didn't underachieve in the regular season. The compensation they got from St Louis for signing Nedved in the second half really changed the look of the team. Namely Hedican and Brown. Huge boost to the back end. They went into the playoffs a much better team than their final standing indicated. It was much like Minny when they played the Isles in the finals. First half of the season they had the worst record in the league and then made several trades. Suddenly in the second half they had a better record than the Isles. They went into the playoffs a much improved team with a very average regular season record.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Baggins said:

The '82 team had the path to the finals cleared for them. They were 4th in the west and never played a higher ranked team until the finals. LA upset 1st place Edmonton (the heavy favorite) and Chicago upset both the 2nd and 3rd place teams. The Canucks played 5th, 8th and 6th to attain the finals. Not exactly daunting.

The '82 team was unbeaten in their final 9 games of the regular season. They beat the mighty Habs at the Montreal Forum during that streak. Winning games in high scoring fashion like outscoring Calgary and Winnipeg 12-2 on the weekend and outscoring Marcel Dionne's LA Kings 13-4 in back-to-back games. Guess what. The Oilers choked against the Kings. The Canucks didn't. The North Stars couldn't handle Denis Savard and Chicago's toughness. The Canucks did. 11 and 2 going into the finals. Not to mention more air travel in comparison to other clubs. Guess what. The Islanders nearly choked against lowly Pittsburgh and they played Quebec instead of Montreal. It works both ways. The Canucks deserve full credit for what they accomplished that year. They worked hard as a team, had each other's backs, their best players were their best players(except for that flake Hlinka) and no-name guys like Neil Belland stepped up. And remember, they were missing Kevin McCarthy, their captain and leader on defense as well as d-man Jiri Bubla and young offensive d-man Rick Lanz.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Tiger-Hearted said:

The '82 team was unbeaten in their final 9 games of the regular season. They beat the mighty Habs at the Montreal Forum during that streak. Winning games in high scoring fashion like outscoring Calgary and Winnipeg 12-2 on the weekend and outscoring Marcel Dionne's LA Kings 13-4 in back-to-back games. Guess what. The Oilers choked against the Kings. The Canucks didn't. The North Stars couldn't handle Denis Savard and Chicago's toughness. The Canucks did. 11 and 2 going into the finals. Not to mention more air travel in comparison to other clubs. Guess what. The Islanders nearly choked against lowly Pittsburgh and they played Quebec instead of Montreal. It works both ways. The Canucks deserve full credit for what they accomplished that year. They worked hard as a team, had each other's backs, their best players were their best players(except for that flake Hlinka) and no-name guys like Neil Belland stepped up. And remember, they were missing Kevin McCarthy, their captain and leader on defense as well as d-man Jiri Bubla and young offensive d-man Rick Lanz.

That sums up that playoff run. They beat teams the should have beaten. There was nothing Cinderella about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Squamfan said:

honslty AV should have started Cory Schenider in game 6 vs Boston

After Luongo had a shutout in game five and saved our butts in a 1-0 game? I doubt that would have gone over too well with most.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Silky mitts said:

Healthy hamhuis and Kesler we would have the cup 

I would add Ehrhoff to that list. Both our best offensive D had shot affecting injuries. Ehrhoff's was the worse of the two though. He was giving up on pucks to avoid hits with his shoulder as bad as it was. Edlers broken fingers affected his shot but not his physical play. Losing Hamhuis was a huge, huge blow on the back end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, -AJ- said:

After Luongo had a shutout in game five and saved our butts in a 1-0 game? I doubt that would have gone over too well with most.

considering Luongo first two games in Boston, it was  worth a shot? The game went exactly the same as the other games luongo could  not stop anything?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Baggins said:

I would add Ehrhoff to that list. Both our best offensive D had shot affecting injuries. Ehrhoff's was the worse of the two though. He was giving up on pucks to avoid hits with his shoulder as bad as it was. Edlers broken fingers affected his shot but not his physical play. Losing Hamhuis was a huge, huge blow on the back end.

The hockey gods were trolling us in that I think Salo (of all people) was the most healthy of the lot.  Ballard just sucked (even when healthy).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, NewbieCanuckFan said:

The hockey gods were trolling us in that I think Salo (of all people) was the most healthy of the lot.  Ballard just sucked (even when healthy).

Even Salo missed 4 playoff games. He wasn't as effective offensively either throughout the playoffs. Many say injuries are an excuse. But the simple truth is when you have as many key injuries as we did it's rather amazing we got to game 7 of the finals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That series deserved an asterisk for the way the league treated in the Cup final.  I will never understand how they changed the rules from the playoffs to the Final.   I think that was the beginning of a rotten refereeing league-wide the aftermath of it.  We'll never know the whole truth about the whole series including suspension and treatment toward the Canucks during the final.  It was very puzzling and is not what the league wanted, more goals at that time and they have reverted back into an old habit.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, mikeyman109 said:

whether you finish 2nd or 31st they dont give you a cup an ring or a parade.

i think you are cup half empty kinda person ?

 

not much can create joy for you ?

 

i thought all of the 3 cup runs were amazing successes

would have preferred a different final outcome

but they were fun until the last game

 

i'll remove my rose coloured glasses though

and try to acheive your perception of the world

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, coolboarder said:

That series deserved an asterisk for the way the league treated in the Cup final.  I will never understand how they changed the rules from the playoffs to the Final.   I think that was the beginning of a rotten refereeing league-wide the aftermath of it.  We'll never know the whole truth about the whole series including suspension and treatment toward the Canucks during the final.  It was very puzzling and is not what the league wanted, more goals at that time and they have reverted back into an old habit.  

The fact Aaron Rome was suspended for his hit on Horton but Boychuk doesn't get penalized for almost turning Mason Raymond into a paraplegic was absolutely sickening. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Tiger-Hearted said:

The fact Aaron Rome was suspended for his hit on Horton but Boychuk doesn't get penalized for almost turning Mason Raymond into a paraplegic was absolutely sickening. 

Or the fact that Andrew Ference didn't receive a penalty for the two handed slash to Bieksa's calves.

 

Marchand repeatedly rabbit punching Daniel Sedin resulted in no penalty.

 

The officiating in the NHL has been pathetic for decades now, but the complete lack of calls on actions with the intent to injure clearly showed a definite bias (most likely paid by Jacobs) that can't be merely explained away by the entire officiating staff being irretrievably stupid, and horrible at their jobs.

 

It's become accepted in the league that the officiating is a joke and most players/coaches/managers/owners seem resigned to this fact, instead of unanimously demanding that there be greater accountability thrust on the officials in the NHL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Boston played Tampa in the conference finals. It went to Game 7 and the Bruins won 1-0, with no penalties called I think, which greatly favoured Boston.

Had Tampa found a way to win that game, I’m pretty confident we would have won the cup. Tampa had oodles of talent, but we had a smidge more.

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...