the grinder Posted August 14, 2019 Share Posted August 14, 2019 3 minutes ago, Yung1 said: ok. I think he will, but I think there's a fair argument to made against him getting his number retired. I just thought it was silly to compare his impact to Kesler's. just saying kesler made an impact as well for the canucks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted August 14, 2019 Share Posted August 14, 2019 15 hours ago, theo5789 said: And he played some of his best hockey here and was very impactful to our team. Being in the HoF simply adds to his status. Do you think Bure would've had his number retired here if he wasn't in the HoF? So while I know that they don't go hand in hand, it would be another legendary player that should be recognized by our franchise (the debate obviously being number retirement or ROH). If by the time Luongo does enter the HoF (I imagine he won't be in that soon), we will see if we will ever have another goalie like him. To be clear there, I'm still on the fence. I think he deserves a bit more than ROH, but not quite number retirement. However with the history of who we have retired, it leans more in that direction. I honestly believe the only reason Bure's number was retired Acquilini was friends with him when he played here. I believe he should have been RoH. It's a good point though, retiring Bure's number did lower the bar imo. So Lou would have to be considered as he actually played more games here than Bure. But I still stand by my statement that number retirement is not the same criteria as HHoF and one doesn't guarantee the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theo5789 Posted August 14, 2019 Share Posted August 14, 2019 43 minutes ago, Baggins said: I honestly believe the only reason Bure's number was retired Acquilini was friends with him when he played here. I believe he should have been RoH. It's a good point though, retiring Bure's number did lower the bar imo. So Lou would have to be considered as he actually played more games here than Bure. But I still stand by my statement that number retirement is not the same criteria as HHoF and one doesn't guarantee the other. I agree they don't go hand in hand, but it adds to Luongo's legacy where the "prime" of his career was here in Vancouver which would have vaulted him into HoF territory. Perhaps at that point is when we even consider retiring his number and also to see if anyone can step up and make Luongo look more ordinary and thus not truly "deserving" of the honour. Not saying it's a lock, but something to consider for those who think if we decide to retire his number that it would be this year or next. It may take several years before Luongo makes it in, so who knows how we will feel at that point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
khay Posted August 14, 2019 Share Posted August 14, 2019 On 8/13/2019 at 4:41 PM, Coconuts said: Perhaps, but if we're going to play the speculation game I could say we might have drafted someone else and that they could have been successful here too. I appreciate what he did during his tenure and and I'm not trying to take away from the numbers he put up or his tenure here. But in my eyes he was only dominant for a couple seasons, injuries played a part in that unfortunately but it was what it was. Jersey retirement is a subject most folks have different takes and standards for so I'm going to respectfully agree to disagree. Same. But I have to point out that there is no speculation game regarding Nazzy. Nazzy did bring the fans back, that's not a speculation. Someone else that we didn't draft did whatever, that is speculation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
khay Posted August 14, 2019 Share Posted August 14, 2019 16 hours ago, the grinder said: ummm naslund brought the fans back , I think you are referring to bure , if it weren't for bure they would not be a gm place( rogers) for naslund to play in Bure didn't bring back the fans, Bure brought a lot of new young fans. Nazzy brought those fans back. Not sure if you are aware but Messier era, if you can call it an era, turned the fans away. The team was actually losing money. Nazzy brought the fans back and set foundation for what transpired i.e., the Sedin era. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the grinder Posted August 15, 2019 Share Posted August 15, 2019 (edited) 4 hours ago, khay said: Bure didn't bring back the fans, Bure brought a lot of new young fans. Nazzy brought those fans back. Not sure if you are aware but Messier era, if you can call it an era, turned the fans away. The team was actually losing money. Nazzy brought the fans back and set foundation for what transpired i.e., the Sedin era. ummm just like to point out again if I know about bure .you think I would kind of know about messier right , , I said if weren't for bure naslund wouldn't had rogers to play at , before bure the team was in trouble . the lions and whitecaps were the number 1 and 2 teams , if we never got bure , who knows were the team was heading , when you mention naslund , oh west coast express when you mention bure , it just bure and mic drop Edited August 15, 2019 by the grinder Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the grinder Posted August 15, 2019 Share Posted August 15, 2019 (edited) 5 hours ago, Baggins said: I honestly believe the only reason Bure's number was retired Acquilini was friends with him when he played here. I believe he should have been RoH. It's a good point though, retiring Bure's number did lower the bar imo. So Lou would have to be considered as he actually played more games here than Bure. But I still stand by my statement that number retirement is not the same criteria as HHoF and one doesn't guarantee the other. ummm bure lowered the bar ? are linden and smyl or naslund in the hall of fame ? see this opens up pandoras box maybe if florida retires bure number then we will retire loungos number that sounds fair lol Edited August 15, 2019 by the grinder Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted August 15, 2019 Share Posted August 15, 2019 1 hour ago, the grinder said: ummm bure lowered the bar ? are linden and smyl or naslund in the hall of fame ? see this opens up pandoras box maybe if florida retires bure number then we will retire loungos number that sounds fair lol It's not about the hall of fame, it's about the franchise. Do we need to retire Messier's number? He's in the hall of fame as well. Why hasn't Florida retired Bure's number? I read some years back Florida offered Bure their RoH and he declined. Not a high enough honor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the grinder Posted August 15, 2019 Share Posted August 15, 2019 32 minutes ago, Baggins said: It's not about the hall of fame, it's about the franchise. Do we need to retire Messier's number? He's in the hall of fame as well. Why hasn't Florida retired Bure's number? I read some years back Florida offered Bure their RoH and he declined. Not a high enough honor. lol I said it about messier as well , my reasoning for no to retiring loungo number , if florida retires bure we retire loungos simple roh till then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
khay Posted August 15, 2019 Share Posted August 15, 2019 7 hours ago, the grinder said: ummm just like to point out again if I know about bure .you think I would kind of know about messier right , , I said if weren't for bure naslund wouldn't had rogers to play at , before bure the team was in trouble . the lions and whitecaps were the number 1 and 2 teams , if we never got bure , who knows were the team was heading , when you mention naslund , oh west coast express when you mention bure , it just bure and mic drop OK. So you are just trying to help me to prove my point that Bure attracted a lot of new fans whereas Nazzy brought them back after they turned away during Mess era. And how do I know if you know Messier era. I don't know you personally. You may have followed hockey during Bure era then left for all I know. Honestly, I don't understand the point that you are trying to make. It's kind of hard to read your post. Hate to be a grammar police because I ain't good with grammar myself but when it's this bad, I just gotta point it out. What you wrote is huge a$$ run-on-sentence. Sorry, didn't try hard to understand your post so I may have missed your point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the grinder Posted August 15, 2019 Share Posted August 15, 2019 (edited) 11 hours ago, khay said: OK. So you are just trying to help me to prove my point that Bure attracted a lot of new fans whereas Nazzy brought them back after they turned away during Mess era. And how do I know if you know Messier era. I don't know you personally. You may have followed hockey during Bure era then left for all I know. Honestly, I don't understand the point that you are trying to make. It's kind of hard to read your post. Hate to be a grammar police because I ain't good with grammar myself but when it's this bad, I just gotta point it out. What you wrote is huge a$$ run-on-sentence. Sorry, didn't try hard to understand your post so I may have missed your point. lol . you couldn't read that ? Right , looks like you read that just fine , I know your game , hurl a insult just to deflect away from the topic . Is my grammar better now? You know exactly the point I made , you even mentioned it , so to make it quite clear to you then . If it is not for bure , the canucks would not be in Vancouver at all, so if not for bure no rogers arena , no naslund no sedins ,( did you get that ) As for naslund bringing back the fans , it was a trio of players called the westcoast express , not just naslund so lets get that straight , do you understand that ? naslund didn't save the franchise and naslund had nothing to do with burke drafting the twins ., If you want to thank anyone for the swedes on the team thank Thomas Gradin not naslund. p,s t if a fan talks about bure and naslund to think they wouldn't know about messier , come on now Edited August 15, 2019 by the grinder Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nurnge Posted August 16, 2019 Share Posted August 16, 2019 He's still on the Canucks "CAP" Payroll so to me he might be retired from Florida But not Vancouver . Ask me again when we are not still paying Cap for him . Then I will probably say yeah throw in Mclean as well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChuckNORRIS4Cup Posted August 16, 2019 Share Posted August 16, 2019 On 8/13/2019 at 10:46 PM, King Heffy said: How about sharing the honour with McLean? Still wouldn't feel right to me given McLean's already clearly been deemed not worthy of retirement by virtue of his ROH induction. Hey Florida wants to retire it great fine good enough, at least he gets it somewhere, I can live with that, if Canucks had won the cup in 94 then I believe McLean's would of been retired. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts