Canucks All-time First 2 Fantasy lines

[Kevin Biestra]

31 minutes ago, janisahockeynut said:

Yes, I do agree with you, but feel that if he was with those other two, he would be in the middle of it, whether he has a choice or not........personally, I think he would think it was fun.................by the way.....I almost puked to put him in as a Canuck.........I friggin hate him.

 

 

I wonder if anything could have ever lit a fire under Messier while he was in Vancouver.  I felt like he fell in love with his own legend after 1994 and seemed to think he had earned the right to play on the first line in the NHL for as long as he wanted thereafter.  He wasn't the same guy when he went back to the Rangers after the Canucks either.  He wasn't as downright pathetic as he was in Vancouver, but he still seemed to want to coast on his own reputation.  The "in love with his own legend" thing is readily apparent in the Mark Messier Leadership Award, not just the award itself but its name and especially how the winner is determined.  There's nothing like it in any other major sport and the thing is actually an embarrassment.

 

Anyway, if anybody could light a fire under Messier it would indeed be Stan Smyl, as you've pointed out.  Though I'm kind of inclined to think that Messier might be as likely to drag Kesler down to his level as Kesler would be to elevate Messier.

[alucard]

@IBatch 

 

 

[Patel Bure]

5 hours ago, janisahockeynut said:

Forwards

 

Mogilny - Pettersson - Bure..................................Pure skill........I would put this line up against any line

 

Naslund - Hank - Bertuzzi....................................Imagine an upgrade on Morrison

 

Dank -  Sundin - Linden.......................................not a bad third line

 

Kesler - Messier - Smyl..................................What a pain in the arse to play against

 

13th forward without a doubt................................Burrows.............he could play on any line

 

HM.........Tony Tanti, Thomas Gradin

 

Defense

 

Paul Reinhart  - Quinn Hughes

 

Mattais Ohlund - Jeff Brown

 

Christian Ehrhoff - Chris Tanev

 

7th defenseman................Jyrki Lumme

 

HM....................................Harold Snepts and Alex Edler

 

Goalies

 

Starter........................Roberto Luongo

Backup.......................Kirk McLean

 

HM..............................Richard Brodeur

 

 

 

 

My only concern with your top 6 here is....

 

1) The lack of size on your first line.  Guys like Pettersson and Bure need atleast one guy that can create space for them.  
 

2) The lack of defensive consciousness and hockey IQ for the twins.  The twins and Bertuzzi could certainly be used in certain situations (ozone starts, PP, etc), but they wouldn’t be as good as many think 5 on 5.  Yes, the twins need someone that has skill, has sandpaper, can create space, and loves to go to the net, but they also need someone that has a high hockey IQ and is good defensively.    That is why Burrows played so well with the twins.   In prime Linden would be the best fit for the twins imo.  
 

I love your bottom 6, but am not sure if Kesler can play LW.

 

I love your defensive pairings as well.

 

I would personally go with Markstrom or even Richard Brodeur over Luongo.  Lou was a great goalie and also had some terrific playoff performances, but a number of those meltdowns were a little too much for my liking.   

[Patel Bure]

On 10/25/2020 at 7:49 AM, IBatch said:

If your going for clutch and playoff performance, you need guys like Linden, Ronning, Courtnall etc on your team.    Some players elevate come post season,  some stay about the same, and some regress or can’t put up similar points in the post season.   If you look at all-time playoffs PGP (points per game played),  the Sedins are 8th and 11th all-time, and big minus players too, including our run to the final (-11ish)....  Linden is the first guy you’d want off the board in this case Captain Clutch for sure.  Bure, Gradin, Ronning, Courtnall, Linden round our your top five in this category not including Miller and EP...

 

And like Biestra already pointed out Courtnall was on the third line in 94.

 

Its also worth noting Linden scored considerably more often in the playoffs then in the regular season...go all the way to around 54 to find him on the all-time list PGP in the regular season (of course some guys muddy the list with just a handful of games)...he’s are all-time leader in virtually every category come the post season though.    Right after him on the PGP is Smyl (post season)...and all the top 7 are plus players.   The Sedins were great regular season players and ok playoff performers but not really what I’d create if I was doing a top six for the post-season.  
 

The best part about right now is Miller,EP, QHs and Horvat are also on this list.  The WCE era was cursed come the second season...Bertuzzi is right below Wellwood at 19, with two more games played.  Horvat has already played one game less then Bertuzzi, and 10th on the list - just saying how lucky we have it now.   Great things on the horizon as in early 90’s great.  A better playoff then regular season team by the looks of things so far - just like when Linden teams pretty much gave us a bye to the second round.

 

One more playoffs like last year and I’d consider any of the new core, QHs set a record that stood since 94...on that Brown and Lumme deserve the honours for top D playoff performers.   After that it gets much harder.   Bieksa is the only plus player of Salo, Jovo, Ohlund and Edler - and is just ahead of Salo in PGP and goals...and he did elevate his play as well playing on our top line in 2011 so I’d go with him next.   

 

Bure is obvious.   As is McLean.   Anyone who posts stats like he did in 94 deserves the top spot, and did it standing up.  Another guy who elevated his play.  
 

Yes it seems obvious that Sedin Sedin Naslund and Bertuzzi should be in the top six but it’s not really that simple.    Their playoff performances were often underwhelming, especially compared to regular season successes.   Tough to leave them off but from what I’ve seen this might work the best.

Courtnall Linden Bure

Tanti  Ronning  Smyl

 

Lumme   Brown

Edler Bieksa 

 

On Ronning.   Scored 24 goals ... ... he was a clutch second C for us, arguably the best we’ve ever had,  without question when the chips were down although Horvat might have something to say about that after his 10 goal performance this year.    I expect this list would look a lot different five years from now.   Too early for Miller and Co ...

I like Geoff Courtnal but remember him being a little inconsistent.  I do love Ronning though and am trying to see if I can fit him in my personal line up.   One thing I like about my lines however, is that many of my guys can play different positions up front and could also be used in different roles.  Could the same be said about Ronning and Courtnal?

 

To your point, while guys like the WCE and the twins were relatively underwhelming in the playoffs, they were underwhelming on the top line going up against the toughest defensive pairings.   Would they be underwhelming going up against second and third lines, if Bure and Pettersson played on the top line?   What if Kessler and Linden (two playoff warrior beasts) played with the WCE and twins respectively? 

 

Miller-Pettersson-Bure

Sedin-Sedin-Linden

Naslund-Kesler-Bertuzzi

Burrows-Horvat-Mogilny 

 

Smyl

 

Edler-Brown

Hughes-Bieksa

Ohlund-Salo

 

Jovanovski

 

Using your suggestion, I probably could go with......

 

Courtnal-Ronning-Mogilny on my 4th line, or even use Gelinas instead of Courtnal and Burrows.

Edited October 26, 2020 by DarkIndianRises

[DrJockitch]

I see Adam Gaudette playing a lot like Geoff Courtnal if slides up to Bo's right wing.

[Patel Bure]

1 hour ago, DrJockitch said:

I see Adam Gaudette playing a lot like Geoff Courtnal if slides up to Bo's right wing.

Hope you’re right.   Boeser, Gaudette, and Virtanen on the right side would be a strong advantage if Gaudette took ownership of that role.  Sutter could play his more natural 3rd line C position.

[Tortorella's Rant]

Odjick-Brashear-Tiger

Rypien-Linden-Podkolzin

[DrJockitch]

11 minutes ago, DarkIndianRises said:

Hope you’re right.   Boeser, Gaudette, and Virtanen on the right side would be a strong advantage if Gaudette took ownership of that role.  Sutter could play his more natural 3rd line C position.

I just don’t think Sutter skates well enough to play C in NHL anymore. 
All the surgeries have built up along with time and the game gets faster and faster. 
I still prefer him on RW but suspect he will be playing third line C if we don’t see anymore significant changes before the season.

Problem is I don’t really like the option of having Sutter as C with Jake on his wing. Kills Jakes offensive game. 
Don’t like having Gaudette play C with Sutter on his wing for basically same reason. 

Edited October 26, 2020 by DrJockitch

[IBatch]

6 hours ago, DarkIndianRises said:

I like Geoff Courtnal but remember him being a little inconsistent.  I do love Ronning though and am trying to see if I can fit him in my personal line up.   One thing I like about my lines however, is that many of my guys can play different positions up front and could also be used in different roles.  Could the same be said about Ronning and Courtnal?

 

To your point, while guys like the WCE and the twins were relatively underwhelming in the playoffs, they were underwhelming on the top line going up against the toughest defensive pairings.   Would they be underwhelming going up against second and third lines, if Bure and Pettersson played on the top line?   What if Kessler and Linden (two playoff warrior beasts) played with the WCE and twins respectively? 

 

Miller-Pettersson-Bure

Sedin-Sedin-Linden

Naslund-Kesler-Bertuzzi

Burrows-Horvat-Mogilny 

 

Smyl

 

Edler-Brown

Hughes-Bieksa

Ohlund-Salo

 

Jovanovski

 

Using your suggestion, I probably could go with......

 

Courtnal-Ronning-Mogilny on my 4th line, or even use Gelinas instead of Courtnal and Burrows.

Ronning, Babych and Linden from that team the guys that actually were better in the playoffs.  Courtnall deserves recognition too given he moved up and down and still managed around a PGP...Gelinas was great too - even Craven deserves some props as does Diduck, Babych’s partner.   Bure was the same Bure of course but didn’t need to elevate given he was already so darn good.   On the PP and the PK and 5 x 5... Churla says hello too, like Theo Fluery definitely not a push over.   Kesler was hard to leave out of my top six, but given Ronning multiple heroic’s, from more then just one playoffs, he gets the nod on my team for second C.  
 

I tried to keep to the OP so wasn’t moving guys off position - that said Linden was a winger first so accept your moving him to the Sedins wing, and maybe all those guys in their prime would have done something amazing.   Linden was a complete player in the same mold as Howe.   How many guys did he put through the boards again?   Puck hound and great on the boards too.  
 

Cant put Miller ahead of Tanti, if we are basing it off one playoffs or so then Gradin and Bolderiev, Reinhart etc also deserve serious consideration.   And if your looking for balance and a proper fourth line then where is Neely and Fraser?   I’d have Smyl ahead of Bertuzzi.   Both Naslund and Bertuzzi where not good defensively, it’s why Morrison helped that line work, he was the only guy that would go back to help...I do like your defense but where is Lumme?  Great PKer, the Lumme flip out I won’t ever forget - master of the big long slow lob - and no slouch at offense either.    And can’t put QHs or EP in yet.   If this was this era then maybe but before the lock-out I have serious concerns for their health.   It was nasty and players were much bigger in the 90’s early 2000’s... the team you’ve created is an all-star team of sorts - need some pugilence beyond Jovo.   Fraser would be a good add same with Neely even the one we had. 

 

Also think guys like Oddliefson, Kurtenbach, Rota 

Ververgaert, Lidster, Skriko, Sundstrom, etc are getting ignored...even Butcher and Snepsts ... no team of all—stars  wins a cup, also need the “little things” which is why blue chippers are often left out in favour of the Claude Lemuiexs, Mike Keanes, Otto’s of the world when Canada Cup, Olympics teams even are created.     Kesler for sure would make a four line team...Will get back to you with my all-time team - how I’d create the cup winner. 
 

The Sutters and Tikanen’s/ Linsmans/Bridgemans...matter too. 

Edited October 26, 2020 by IBatch

[Patel Bure]

1 hour ago, IBatch said:

Ronning, Babych and Linden from that team the guys that actually were better in the playoffs.  Courtnall deserves recognition too given he moved up and down and still managed around a PGP...Gelinas was great too - even Craven deserves some props as does Diduck, Babych’s partner.   Bure was the same Bure of course but didn’t need to elevate given he was already so darn good.   On the PP and the PK and 5 x 5... Churla says hello too, like Theo Fluery definitely not a push over.   Kesler was hard to leave out of my top six, but given Ronning multiple heroic’s, from more then just one playoffs, he gets the nod on my team for second C.  
 

I tried to keep to the OP so wasn’t moving guys off position - that said Linden was a winger first so accept your moving him to the Sedins wing, and maybe all those guys in their prime would have done something amazing.   Linden was a complete player in the same mold as Howe.   How many guys did he put through the boards again?   Puck hound and great on the boards too.  
 

Cant put Miller ahead of Tanti, if we are basing it off one playoffs or so then Gradin and Bolderiev, Reinhart etc also deserve serious consideration.   And if your looking for balance and a proper fourth line then where is Neely and Fraser?   I’d have Smyl ahead of Bertuzzi.   Both Naslund and Bertuzzi where not good defensively, it’s why Morrison helped that line work, he was the only guy that would go back to help...I do like your defense but where is Lumme?  Great PKer, the Lumme flip out I won’t ever forget - master of the big long slow lob - and no slouch at offense either.    And can’t put QHs or EP in yet.   If this was this era then maybe but before the lock-out I have serious concerns for their health.   It was nasty and players were much bigger in the 90’s early 2000’s... the team you’ve created is an all-star team of sorts - need some pugilence beyond Jovo.   Fraser would be a good add same with Neely even the one we had. 

 

Also think guys like Oddliefson, Kurtenbach, Rota 

Ververgaert, Lidster, Skriko, Sundstrom, etc are getting ignored...even Butcher ... no team of all—stars  wins a cup, also need the “little things” which is why blue chippers are often left out in favour of the Claude Lemuiexs, Mike Keanes, Otto’s of the world when Canada Cup, Olympics teams even are created.     Kesler for sure would make a four line team...Will get back to you with my all-time team - how I’d create the cup winner. 
 

The Sutters and Tikanen’s/ Linsmans/Bridgemans...matter too. 

Completely agree with you about Linden, Ronning, and Babych.   What I went for with my team however, was making sure that all/most players could play multiple roles in multiple situations unless they were 1-2 standard deviations above normal in their area of excellence (ie Bure and Hughes).   
 

In the case of Ronning and Babych, can Babych be used on a PP or in an offensive situation like the other ‘defensive’ guys in my line-up? (Edler, Bieksa, Ohlund?).   Ronning is an excellent center, but is he better than Pettersson, Henrik, Kesler, Linden, or Horvat? I’m not so sure.   And I’ve already got Linden playing wing on the twin line so that he can bring a defensive presence, high IQ to match the twins, and being able to take face offs to help Henrik.  
 

I put Miller ahead of Tanti for similar reasons.  Miller can be used in all situations (PK, PP, playmaker, defensive conscience, provide sandpaper, can take face offs, etc.).   I’m admittedly a bit weak my knowledge of Tanti, but I’m not sure if he was as well rounded as Miller.   Could he take face offs and kill penalties?  
 

I agree with you about Smyl over Bertuzzi, but again.....if you put Bertuzzi away from the top line and top defenders of other teams in a playoff situation, then would Smyl still be better than Bertuzzi?  I’m not so sure.   Even though it was for a fleeting moment in 2003, Bertuzzi was the best player in the NHL bar none.   No Canuck has ever been the best player in the league (and yes, I realize that both Hank and Dan won Hart trophies).
 

I omitted guys like Neely, Peca, Sundin, and “that guy from Edmonton and NYR,” because their best playing days and moments of significance were on other teams.  I liked the wayTikanen played for us in 1996 against the Avs in the first round (and that 95-96 season in general), but I don’t know who I’d take out in favor of him.
 

As far as those other players that you mentioned go, I only started watching hockey in 1987, and my first three years of watching are quite fuzzy and so I will have a natural recency bias (although I’m trying not to).  But still - are those guys better and more well rounded than the guys in my line-up?

 

There is one thing I will agree with you on:  Lumme.   If Lumme could be used as a PK’er, then he replaces Jovanovski in my opinion as the 7th dman.  
 

That’s just how I would do things however:

 

I *might* consider putting someone like Adams or Tanti ahead of Burrows, but Burrows was deadly in the clutch and could also be used in numerous situations.  
 

Miller-Pettersson-Bure

Sedin-Sedin-Linden

Naslund-Kesler-Bertuzzi

Burrows-Horvat-Mogilny

 

Smyl

 

Edler-Brown

Hughes-Bieksa

Ohlund-Salo 

 

Lumme

 

Markstrom

McLean

Edited October 26, 2020 by DarkIndianRises

[IBatch]

2 hours ago, DarkIndianRises said:

Completely agree with you about Linden, Ronning, and Babych.   What I went for with my team however, was making sure that all/most players could play multiple roles in multiple situations unless they were 1-2 standard deviations above normal in their area of excellence (ie Bure and Hughes).   
 

In the case of Ronning and Babych, can Babych be used on a PP or in an offensive situation like the other ‘defensive’ guys in my line-up? (Edler, Bieksa, Ohlund?).   Ronning is an excellent center, but is he better than Pettersson, Henrik, Kesler, Linden, or Horvat? I’m not so sure.   And I’ve already got Linden playing wing on the twin line so that he can bring a defensive presence, high IQ to match the twins, and being able to take face offs to help Henrik.  
 

I put Miller ahead of Tanti for similar reasons.  Miller can be used in all situations (PK, PP, playmaker, defensive conscience, provide sandpaper, can take face offs, etc.).   I’m admittedly a bit weak my knowledge of Tanti, but I’m not sure if he was as well rounded as Miller.   Could he take face offs and kill penalties?  
 

I agree with you about Smyl over Bertuzzi, but again.....if you put Bertuzzi away from the top line and top defenders of other teams in a playoff situation, then would Smyl still be better than Bertuzzi?  I’m not so sure.   Even though it was for a fleeting moment in 2003, Bertuzzi was the best player in the NHL bar none.   No Canuck has ever been the best player in the league (and yes, I realize that both Hank and Dan won Hart trophies).
 

I omitted guys like Neely, Peca, Sundin, and “that guy from Edmonton and NYR,” because their best playing days and moments of significance were on other teams.  I liked the wayTikanen played for us in 1996 against the Avs in the first round (and that 95-96 season in general), but I don’t know who I’d take out in favor of him.
 

As far as those other players that you mentioned go, I only started watching hockey in 1987, and my first three years of watching are quite fuzzy and so I will have a natural recency bias (although I’m trying not to).  But still - are those guys better and more well rounded than the guys in my line-up?

 

There is one thing I will agree with you on:  Lumme.   If Lumme could be used as a PK’er, then he replaces Jovanovski in my opinion as the 7th dman.  
 

That’s just how I would do things however:

 

I *might* consider putting someone like Adams or Tanti ahead of Burrows, but Burrows was deadly in the clutch and could also be used in numerous situations.  
 

Miller-Pettersson-Bure

Sedin-Sedin-Linden

Naslund-Kesler-Bertuzzi

Burrows-Horvat-Mogilny

 

Smyl

 

Edler-Brown

Hughes-Bieksa

Ohlund-Salo 

 

Lumme

 

Markstrom

McLean

DIR looking good....the only thing about omitting Peca, Sundin etc is Miller, QHs, EP etc are also disqualified.   Yes it’s semantics.   Love you mentioned Peca, he’s a good example of a guy we had for a few years that was good and moved on to have a great career.   Same as Neely and Vaive...  no worries your lineup looks very good, I’m stuck with the older guys ... Markstrom as you started over Luongo and McLean also follows you theme - that’s OK.   There is nobody in your lineup I don’t love - they are-we’re all great players.  Wow what a team right?    I’d take QHs out and insert Reinhart and consider adding Lumme .   But I get where your going with this.  As I said right away a few pages ago - I fully expect that in five years this will have a lot of the current players.   Ronning is the only huge omission,  but that’s ok.     He was a one man wrecking crew for us in two playoffs.   Wish Quin kept him but understand the circumstances.   One of the best little guys of his era - used to call him Radar from Mash.   
 

Edit:  As long as every team has Linden, Bure and McLean I’m enjoying this.   Ronning and Smyl are some big omissions but I get we’ve had a ton of amazing players over the years.   I’m sure that we could create two teams that would win a cup right now. 

Edited October 26, 2020 by IBatch

[Kevin Biestra]

8 minutes ago, IBatch said:

Ronning is the only huge omission,  but that’s ok.     He was a one man wrecking crew for us in two playoffs.   Wish Quin kept him but understand the circumstances.   One of the best little guys of his era - used to call him Radar from Mash.

 

He was one of the best little guys in NHL history.  Up there with Fleury and my old time hockey Hall of Fame induction pet project John Ross Roach.

 

Yeah he kind of looked like Radar but I thought he looked like Kyle Reese.

 

 

[Patel Bure]

17 minutes ago, IBatch said:

DIR looking good....the only thing about omitting Peca, Sundin etc is Miller, QHs, EP etc are also disqualified.   Yes it’s semantics.   Love you mentioned Peca, he’s a good example of a guy we had for a few years that was good and moved on to have a great career.   Same as Neely and Vaive...  no worries your lineup looks very good, I’m stuck with the older guys ... Markstrom as you started over Luongo and McLean also follows you theme - that’s OK.   There is nobody in your lineup I don’t love - they are-we’re all great players.  Wow what a team right?    I’d take QHs out and insert Reinhart and consider adding Lumme .   But I get where your going with this.  As I said right away a few pages ago - I fully expect that in five years this will have a lot of the current players.   Ronning is the only huge omission,  but that’s ok.     He was a one man wrecking crew for us in two playoffs.   Wish Quin kept him but understand the circumstances.   One of the best little guys of his era - used to call him Radar from Mash.   
 

Edit:  As long as every team has Linden, Bure and McLean I’m enjoying this.   Ronning and Smyl are some big omissions but I get we’ve had a ton of amazing players over the years.   I’m sure that we could create two teams that would win a cup right now. 

I’ll add a quick note and respond to the rest later if necessary.  Peca/Sundin/Neely, etc., is different from EP, Hughes, and Miller, because the latter three have all had their most significant moments (or enough significant moments as was the case with guys like Mogilny and Luongo) as Canuck players.  

Longevity and/or your peak moments being with the Canucks = being eligible for this roster imo.    Just depends on personal preference though.

 

If someone wants to include Sundin, Peca, Messier, Neely, Ryan Miller, Felix Potvin, Esa Tikanen, Brendan Morrow, Igor Larionov, Vladimir Krutov, etc, since they were extremely successful hockey players that just so happened to play in Vancouver at some point, the more power to them.

 

Luongo doesn’t make the cut for me because as brilliant as he was (most talented goalie we’ve ever had + his 2006-2007 series against Dallas May have been one of the greatest things that I’ve ever witnessed), he just had too many meltdowns for my liking......many of which came when we needed the most.

 

McLean wasn’t the best goalie in the world, but the guy was usually a beast when it mattered most.    Veteran Mclean backing up Markstrom would be my perfect scenario.

Edited October 26, 2020 by DarkIndianRises

[Kevin Biestra]

5 minutes ago, DarkIndianRises said:

I’ll add a quick note and respond to the rest later if necessary.  Peca/Sundin/Neely, etc., is different from EP, Hughes, and Miller, because the latter three have all had their most significant moments (or enough significant moments as was the case with guys like Mogilny and Luongo) as Canuck players.  

Longevity and/or your peak moments being with the Canucks = being eligible for this roster imo.    Just depends on personal preference though.

 

If someone wants to include Sundin, Peca, Messier, Neely, Ryan Miller, Felix Potvin, Esa Tikanen, Brendan Morrow, Igor Larionov, Vladimir Krutov, etc, since they were extremely successful hockey players that just so happened to play in Vancouver at some point, the more power to them.

 

When did Morrow play for Vancouver?

 

Anyway, as to your first line, I get what you're saying but I think the point is that like those old guys who don't make the team, these new guys also have a tiny sample size as Canucks.  If they got traded tomorrow, their biggest career moments when it was all said and done would be with their next team, just as was the case with Vaive, Bill Derlago, Neely, Murray Bannerman, Peca, etc.  Of course if a guy has only played one or two years, his defining moments thus far will be with his first team.

 

Anyway, Vancouver had some great players that just passed through for a cup of coffee at the end.  I made a thread about them...  Pit Martin, Charlie Hodge, Mel Bridgman, etc.  But again, small sample size.

Edited October 26, 2020 by Kevin Biestra

[Patel Bure]

7 minutes ago, Kevin Biestra said:

 

When did Morrow play for Vancouver?

 

Anyway, as to your first line, I get what you're saying but I think the point is that like those old guys who don't make the team, these new guys also have a tiny sample size as Canucks.  If they got traded tomorrow, their biggest career moments when it was all said and done would be with their next team, just as was the case with Vaive, Bill Derlago, Neely, Murray Bannerman, Peca, etc.  Of course if a guy has only played one or two years, his defining moments thus far will be with his first team.

 

Anyway, Vancouver had some great players that just passed through for a cup of coffee at the end.  I made a thread about them...  Pit Martin, Charlie Hodge, Mel Bridgman, etc.  But again, small sample size.

True about the “biggest moments” observation, but I’d only be able to treat it as such after the fact (I.e. I can list Quinn Hughes today, but if he got traded tomorrow and spent the rest of his career with another team, then I’d have to put him in the Sundin/Neely/Peca,etc., category.    Again, that’s just me though.  You guys can have whatever rules you want! :-p

 

ps - I think the Canucks had Morrow for a few games a couple seasons ago? (They got him as a cap dump).   I might be confusing him with someone else though.  I think it was definitely someone from Dallas, but he was washed up.

Edited October 26, 2020 by DarkIndianRises

[Kevin Biestra]

2 minutes ago, DarkIndianRises said:

True about the “biggest moments” observation, but I’d only be able to treat it as such after the fact (I.e. I can list Quinn Hughes today, but if he got traded tomorrow and spent the rest of his career with another team, then I’d have to put him in the Sundin/Neely/Peca,etc., category.    Again, that’s just me though.  You guys can have whatever rules you want! :-p

 

ps - I think the Canucks had Morrow for a few games a couple seasons ago? (They got him as a cap dump).   I might be confusing him with someone else though.  I think it was definitely someone from Dallas, but he was washed up.

 

Jussi Jokinen?

[IBatch]

14 minutes ago, Kevin Biestra said:

 

He was one of the best little guys in NHL history.  Up there with Fleury and my old time hockey Hall of Fame induction pet project John Ross Roach.

 

Yeah he kind of looked like Radar but I thought he looked like Kyle Reese.

 

 

I see your Kyle Reese (wow Ok I guess I watched too much MASH ha ha) and give your Scotty Walker.    Remember when Petit cheap shotted the crap out of him and he went on a 5’9” rampage?   Also he’s one of the key reasons Burke canned Keenan.   Keenan wanted the late ok but not so great anymore Zezzel (and really aside from a cool hockey name he was a Maholtra type) and Burke wanted to keep Walker. He relented to the coaches demands ... but didn’t forget, was Keenans first big nail in his coffin.  The other one was when he pulled the goalie with ten minutes left in the third.   Burke was furious, after the game said if he did that again he’d beat the living sh!t out of him.  I liked Burke.  But I really liked Walker ... and Peca too. 

[Patel Bure]

28 minutes ago, Kevin Biestra said:

 

Jussi Jokinen?

Ah yes him.   :-).    Not Morrow, my bad.

[IBatch]

41 minutes ago, DarkIndianRises said:

Ah yes him.   :-).    Not Morrow, my bad.

Still Morrow was a regular for team Canada making some fans angry given points wasn’t his thing - two-way game was.   Otto, Keane, C Lemuiex, Teak, Linsman, Bridgeman, Peca etc - takes all types to make a team, have the best in all areas and that’s a force of nature.    It’s a tough mental exercise ... we could make an A and B team and on any given night who knows who would win.  

[Patel Bure]

3 hours ago, IBatch said:

Still Morrow was a regular for team Canada making some fans angry given points wasn’t his thing - two-way game was.   Otto, Keane, C Lemuiex, Teak, Linsman, Bridgeman, Peca etc - takes all types to make a team, have the best in all areas and that’s a force of nature.    It’s a tough mental exercise ... we could make an A and B team and on any given night who knows who would win.  

I completely agree with this.   Having said that, remember when Canada selected Rob Zaumner back in 1998 for Nagano?  

 

Anyways.....

 

Regarding my line-up, I still think it qualifies as having “all types.”

 

PWF’s:  Horvat, Miller, Bertuzzi

Two way:  Linden, Kesler

Snipers:  Bure, Naslund, Dan

Playmakers:  Pettersson, Mogilny, Hank

Grinders:  Burrows, Smyl

 

PMD’s:  Hughes, Lumme

OFD:  Salo, Brown

TWD:  Edler, Lumme, Bieksa, Ohlund

 

Shut down line:  Burrows-Kesler-Linden / Ohlund-Salo

Set tone physically:  Miller-Horvat-Bertuzzi / Edler-Bieksa

Offensive blitz:  Mogilny-Pettersson-Bure / Hughes-Salo

 

PK:  Burrows-Kesler / Ohlund-Bieksa

PK:  Linden/Miller /Lumme-Edler

PP:  Numerous options / numerous options

 

I might be off a bit here though.  
 

Alternate line combos:

 

Miller-Horvat-Bertuzzi (set the tone)

Burrows-Kesler-Linden (shut down)

Mogilny-Pettersson-Bure (blitzkreig)

Sedin-Sedin-Smyl (cycle)

 

Naslund (or Mogilny)

 

Edited October 27, 2020 by DarkIndianRises