kloubek Posted March 7, 2022 Share Posted March 7, 2022 54 minutes ago, Kevin Biestra said: I don't think that's very fair to the early 90s Canucks. They had three consecutive great years from 91-92 to 93-94. The first two as division champions with great regular seasons and the second round of the playoffs before running into Gretzky and the Kings, and then everybody knows what happened in 1994. This era can also be extended back to 1989 for the series against Calgary and forward a year or two for at least the victory against St. Louis (Shanaha, Hull, MacInnis, Joseph). 1990-91: 28-43-9. That's a poor record. 91-92: 42-26-12. Admittedly, this was a solid regular season from most perspectives. 4th best in goals for, 6th best in goals against. That's certainly promising. The reason I discount that a bit though is because when the pressure was on in the playoffs, the team faltered. I would not call this "great". 92-93: 46-29-9. Another fairly solid regular season. 4th best in goals against, but 11th in goals for. 7th in the league in points. Nothing amazing, though good for 1st in the division. But they lost again in the division final. With two mid-round exits in a row, I don't think we can call this a very successful era yet. I would again not call this "great". But then there was 93-94. We were a .500 team so making it to the finals was an amazing accomplishment, but I can't say I'm surprised we lost. Back then, Rangers were 52-24-8 and were pretty stacked in the pre-cap world, and far surpassed anything the Canucks had put together to that point. They were one of the top teams in both goals for and goals against. The Canucks played with tons of heart, but at the end of the day, they were a maybe slightly above average team that was above their head. So while the playoff results were outstanding all things considered, it was obvious the team was on a downward trend overall. So really, I think this COULD have been a good era, but the team just didn't have quite enough to make it a really "good" team in my mind, and certainly not "great". I think this can be considered subjective though, and we'll just agree to disagree. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Biestra Posted March 8, 2022 Share Posted March 8, 2022 1 hour ago, kloubek said: 1990-91: 28-43-9. That's a poor record. 91-92: 42-26-12. Admittedly, this was a solid regular season from most perspectives. 4th best in goals for, 6th best in goals against. That's certainly promising. The reason I discount that a bit though is because when the pressure was on in the playoffs, the team faltered. I would not call this "great". 92-93: 46-29-9. Another fairly solid regular season. 4th best in goals against, but 11th in goals for. 7th in the league in points. Nothing amazing, though good for 1st in the division. But they lost again in the division final. With two mid-round exits in a row, I don't think we can call this a very successful era yet. I would again not call this "great". But then there was 93-94. We were a .500 team so making it to the finals was an amazing accomplishment, but I can't say I'm surprised we lost. Back then, Rangers were 52-24-8 and were pretty stacked in the pre-cap world, and far surpassed anything the Canucks had put together to that point. They were one of the top teams in both goals for and goals against. The Canucks played with tons of heart, but at the end of the day, they were a maybe slightly above average team that was above their head. So while the playoff results were outstanding all things considered, it was obvious the team was on a downward trend overall. So really, I think this COULD have been a good era, but the team just didn't have quite enough to make it a really "good" team in my mind, and certainly not "great". I think this can be considered subjective though, and we'll just agree to disagree. As you wish. Were you watching / following the team in the early 90s? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kloubek Posted March 8, 2022 Share Posted March 8, 2022 2 hours ago, Kevin Biestra said: As you wish. Were you watching / following the team in the early 90s? Im 47, and yup... I was. Started following the Canucks around 1991. (Which worked out well, as I didn't have long to wait for a final). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zimmy Posted March 8, 2022 Share Posted March 8, 2022 In the past 30 years (91-92 to 21-22) the franchise is about plus 200 wins and several (I wish there were more) playoff series victories. That is not a fail or C-. Middling to good overall but certainly with some extreme highs and a few low points. Forget this 4000 games bull#@*$. Those first 20 years are always going to disappoint and will tremendously skew numerical analysis. Speaking in a general sense, this team has given us some great thrills these past three decades. If you’ve somehow missed these moments you might simply be too young or suffer from unrealistic expectations as a fan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iceman64 Posted March 8, 2022 Share Posted March 8, 2022 On 3/5/2022 at 10:50 PM, Me_ said: Wow this is crazy: Montreal Canadiens Records: Team Name: Montreal Canadiens Seasons: 104 (1917-18 to 2021-22) NHL Playoff Appearances: 85 NHL Championships: 25 (23 Stanley Cups) Playoff Record: 440-321 Record (W-L-T-OTL): 3487-2336-837-182 (7993 points) All-time Goals Leader: Maurice Richard, 544 All-time Points Leader: Guy Lafleur, 1246 Most Goals, Season: Steve Shutt (1976-77), Guy Lafleur (1977-78), 60 Most Points, Season: Guy Lafleur (1976-77), 136 I would have loved to see the best Habs team against the 80's oilers 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Biestra Posted March 8, 2022 Share Posted March 8, 2022 (edited) 2 hours ago, iceman64 said: I would have loved to see the best Habs team against the 80's oilers Would have been a hell of a matchup. That 76-79 Montreal lineup was insane. Guy Lafleur Steve Shutt Pete Mahovlich Yvan Cournoyer Jacques Lemaire Bob Gainey Doug Jarvis Yvon Lambert Mario Tremblay Doug Risebrough Rejean Houle Pierre Larouche Pierre Mondou Mark Napier Larry Robinson Guy Lapointe Serge Savard John Van Boxmeer Don Awrey Rod Langway Brian Engblom Ken Dryden Bunny Larocque Edited March 8, 2022 by Kevin Biestra 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IBatch Posted March 8, 2022 Share Posted March 8, 2022 (edited) 9 hours ago, Kevin Biestra said: Would have been a hell of a matchup. That 76-79 Montreal lineup was insane. Guy Lafleur Steve Shutt Pete Mahovlich Yvan Cournoyer Jacques Lemaire Bob Gainey Doug Jarvis Yvon Lambert Mario Tremblay Doug Risebrough Rejean Houle Pierre Larouche Pierre Mondou Mark Napier Larry Robinson Guy Lapointe Serge Savard John Van Boxmeer Don Awrey Rod Langway Brian Engblom Ken Dryden Bunny Larocque Those guys were so good that splitting them up in practice like Dryden said - was better then most teams they faced. To this day i can't say we've had a team as good as MTL/NYI/EDM .... and highly doubt we ever will again. TB and now Vegas because - well why not - used their LTIR and no state taxes to combat the parity and that's some smart GMing. We simply can't create a team with 10 deserved all-stars anymore. Kind of sucks. At least the talent level is finally catching up with expansion. Dryden would let goals in on purpose just to challenge his team. Smart guy. Wonder how many. Edit: It was something the see those two teams play a game in their 40-50's in EDM.... Ken Linesman looked like he could still play but of course this was a little bit of a gimmick too... think MTL beat EDM 2-1...and of course they were a lot older ... wasn't Messier just recently retired too lol... Edited March 8, 2022 by IBatch 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boudrias Posted March 8, 2022 Share Posted March 8, 2022 9 hours ago, Kevin Biestra said: Would have been a hell of a matchup. That 76-79 Montreal lineup was insane. Guy Lafleur Steve Shutt Pete Mahovlich Yvan Cournoyer Jacques Lemaire Bob Gainey Doug Jarvis Yvon Lambert Mario Tremblay Doug Risebrough Rejean Houle Pierre Larouche Pierre Mondou Mark Napier Larry Robinson Guy Lapointe Serge Savard John Van Boxmeer Don Awrey Rod Langway Brian Engblom Ken Dryden Bunny Larocque The Habs were my team before the Canucks entered the NHL. I'll give an honourable mention to JC Tremblay who was a tad older than the group above. He was fun to watch. That said as soon as the Canucks showed up I was all in. Been watching, listening, to the Canucks from the first puck drop. Over the years if there was one reoccurring weakness it would be ownerships and managements that were so anxious to give Vancouver a champion that they tried short cuts to achieve it. The current ownership is the best the org has ever had. They have hired good people, including Jim Benning, but redirected when necessary. We will see whether Rutherford & Co. can take us to the next level. Winning a Cup is so hard. A team can do absolutely everything right and still not have success. I get a lot of enjoyment from the process. Let's face it often takes us back to our childhood dreams skating on the pond. 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Biestra Posted March 8, 2022 Share Posted March 8, 2022 (edited) 12 hours ago, Boudrias said: The Habs were my team before the Canucks entered the NHL. I'll give an honourable mention to JC Tremblay who was a tad older than the group above. He was fun to watch. That said as soon as the Canucks showed up I was all in. Been watching, listening, to the Canucks from the first puck drop. Over the years if there was one reoccurring weakness it would be ownerships and managements that were so anxious to give Vancouver a champion that they tried short cuts to achieve it. The current ownership is the best the org has ever had. They have hired good people, including Jim Benning, but redirected when necessary. We will see whether Rutherford & Co. can take us to the next level. Winning a Cup is so hard. A team can do absolutely everything right and still not have success. I get a lot of enjoyment from the process. Let's face it often takes us back to our childhood dreams skating on the pond. JC was great. I just consider him a part of the previous Canadiens dynasty in the 60s (Beliveau, Pocket Rocket). Has to be nice to have your team enjoy a dynasty in back to back (to back) decades. I kind of think of it as (1956-60) and (1965, 66, 68, 69) and (1976-79). And then there are the 1971 and 1973 Cups which are kind of harder to place, are they the 60s dynasty or the late 70s dynasty or neither... And there was certainly a bit of brief overlap between the 60s dynasty and the lineup I posted for the later 70s (Serge Savard, Cournoyer, Lemaire). And darn close to the greatest goalie tandem in history (Vachon and Gump Worsley, or Worsley and future Canuck Charlie Hodge who was no slouch either). Or Jacques Plante / Charlie Hodge for the 50s dynasty. JC also was great in the WHA. Won the AVCO Cup with King Richard on the Nordiques. Edited March 9, 2022 by Kevin Biestra Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erkayloomeh Posted March 8, 2022 Share Posted March 8, 2022 On 3/5/2022 at 9:54 AM, danjr said: Well, 50 years, 4000 games played. I would say I have watched a thousand games, listened to maybe 500 more. Tough not being in the province I was born in, and catching broadcasts. In all those years and games, there have been some great memories. Our Record. 4000GP 1675W 1769L 391T 165OT 75 shoot out wins 12217goals 13079goals against .488% wins percentage. Our win percentage is 30th WORST in that time period. Just because of that single stat I give us a flat out fail. Fav memory of that 5 decades is winning the first Presidents trophy. Next is Daniel's goal, from Henrik. (guess which LOL) I would love to hear your takeaways from these 4000 games. Thank you for this thread. But could you please compile a video of our 12217 goals please. Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erkayloomeh Posted March 8, 2022 Share Posted March 8, 2022 It all started when someone gave me a Habs jersey which I was wearing when this crusty old guy my mom was working for scolded me for wearing that frogs jersey ( back in the day of politically incorrectness) That was around 1972. He told me that I have my own local team I should root for.....the Canucks. So I did. It's been a long haul . I would liken being a Canucks fan to marrying a beautiful woman who was very sweet but wouldn't sleep with you. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erkayloomeh Posted March 8, 2022 Share Posted March 8, 2022 On 3/5/2022 at 12:06 PM, Alflives said: If we are a D what grade do the LOSER LEAFS get during that same time frame? What's lower than an F? G 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boudrias Posted March 9, 2022 Share Posted March 9, 2022 8 hours ago, Kevin Biestra said: JC was great. I just consider him a part of the previous Canadiens dynasty in the 60s (Beliveau, Pocket Rocket). Has to be nice to have your team enjoy a dynasty in back to back (to back) decades. I kind of think of it as (1956-60) and (1965, 66, 68, 69) and (1976-79). And then there are the 1971 and 1973 Cups which are kind of harder to place, are they the 60s dynasty or the late 70s dynasty or neither... And there was certainly a bit of brief overlap between the 60s dynasty and the lineup I posted for the later 70s (Serge Savard, Cournoyer, Lemaire). And darn close to the greatest goalie tandem in history (Vachon and Gump Worsley, or Worsley and future Canuck Charlie Hodge who was no slouch either). Or Jacques Plante / Charlie Hodge for the 50s dynasty. JC also was great in the WHA. Won the AVCO Cup with King Richard on the Nordiques. The Kid Line: Tardiff-Houle-Lafleur. I was in Moscow for the ‘74 WHA series. I got the chance to talk to Reggie Houle. I shook my head at him and asked why he had jumped to the WHA? He smiled at me and rubbed two fingers together and said the money. I was devastated but on thinking about it I could see why he did. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Biestra Posted March 9, 2022 Share Posted March 9, 2022 (edited) 5 hours ago, Boudrias said: The Kid Line: Tardiff-Houle-Lafleur. I was in Moscow for the ‘74 WHA series. I got the chance to talk to Reggie Houle. I shook my head at him and asked why he had jumped to the WHA? He smiled at me and rubbed two fingers together and said the money. I was devastated but on thinking about it I could see why he did. I'm kind of glad they did. Tardif joined the 150 point club with Gretzky, Lemieux, Esposito, Yzerman and Nicholls. A legendary (though mostly forgotten) achievement. I'm glad the WHA existed as it did and had top players...though I wish their stats would get absorbed into the official record books. Guys like Gordie Howe and Bobby Hull, and on the other hand our 80s goaltending tandem Richard Brodeur and John Garrett, would really see their career numbers reflect their total careers. Garrett had 148 WHA wins, Brodeur had 165 (and another 26 in the playoffs) to go with his NHL numbers. That's 39 career playoff wins for King Richard, more than the 34 for either Luongo or McLean. Another 174 goals and 508 points for Gordie, another 99 wins for Gerry Cheevers, another 232 points for Frank Mahovlich, another 303 goals and 638 points for Bobby Hull, 291 more points for Dave Keon. Another 110 points for Wayne...and he deserves them since they made him ineligible for the Calder Trophy. If it wasn't NHL level competition, then why does a year there make him not a rookie? Marc Tardif is actually over 1000 points for NHL + WHA combined. And nobody knows who he is nowadays. Two seasons with 148 points or more. Real Cloutier is over 900 combined. Andre Lacroix...996 points and six straight seasons with >100 points in the WHA. Over 100 assists one year, putting him in a club with only Orr, Gretzky and Mario I think. Mike Rogers is at almost 900 points, and he scored much more in the NHL than the WHA...never got 90 points in 5 seasons in the WHA, then broke 100 points in all of the next three seasons once he switched to the NHL. And your boy JC Tremblay...almost 800 points as a defenseman with NHL and WHA combined. Edited March 9, 2022 by Kevin Biestra 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IBatch Posted March 9, 2022 Share Posted March 9, 2022 (edited) On 3/7/2022 at 6:35 PM, kloubek said: 1990-91: 28-43-9. That's a poor record. 91-92: 42-26-12. Admittedly, this was a solid regular season from most perspectives. 4th best in goals for, 6th best in goals against. That's certainly promising. The reason I discount that a bit though is because when the pressure was on in the playoffs, the team faltered. I would not call this "great". 92-93: 46-29-9. Another fairly solid regular season. 4th best in goals against, but 11th in goals for. 7th in the league in points. Nothing amazing, though good for 1st in the division. But they lost again in the division final. With two mid-round exits in a row, I don't think we can call this a very successful era yet. I would again not call this "great". But then there was 93-94. We were a .500 team so making it to the finals was an amazing accomplishment, but I can't say I'm surprised we lost. Back then, Rangers were 52-24-8 and were pretty stacked in the pre-cap world, and far surpassed anything the Canucks had put together to that point. They were one of the top teams in both goals for and goals against. The Canucks played with tons of heart, but at the end of the day, they were a maybe slightly above average team that was above their head. So while the playoff results were outstanding all things considered, it was obvious the team was on a downward trend overall. So really, I think this COULD have been a good era, but the team just didn't have quite enough to make it a really "good" team in my mind, and certainly not "great". I think this can be considered subjective though, and we'll just agree to disagree. Well then. What would you call the great teams we had during the MG era then? How many playoff games did they win! Edit: Your age is showing suggesting we were on a downward trend as well. How old was Bure, Linden, Ronning, Hedican, Gelinas etc back then? McLean...good grief. Your picking on the team that won more playoff games then any other in franchise history by the way. Not to mention without Linden the Sedins and Luongo don't beat Turco. And he was almost done. Edit: A couple things screwed us. First was salary disclosure. Enough has already been brought up that Nedveds 38 goals were sorely missed in 94, would be like playing without EP these days. And yes NYR we're tops in the league two years in a row during the regular season - they were the favourite. As for the final in 94 it's still viewed as the best of the modern era - that's since expansion just to be clear. Only two goals separated the two teams. NY started hot but it was obvious we had taken over the series .... without a couple days off for them to lick their wounds i highly doubt they win the cup. League added those games because they were older and wanted it that way. "54 long years and all of that"...then a stupid strike. But still we kept winning a round .... Until we win a cup that is still our high water mark as far as playoffs go. As for winning the first round the two previous years ... well ok. Yes your showing your age. They were great games. Which is strange since well look at LA's two cups. Edited March 9, 2022 by IBatch 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kloubek Posted March 9, 2022 Share Posted March 9, 2022 3 hours ago, IBatch said: What would you call the great teams we had during the MG era then? I'm going to ignore most of what you wrote, as I honestly can't make much sense of it. That might be on me. But I will respond to this. My whole post you quoted was in respond to the post which claimed we had great teams in the past. To which I stated I felt we only had ONE great team in our history. And that was the MG era. When he was hired, we improved each year until we peaked in 2010-2011 (great season, great playoffs, great team). But Boston exposed the weaknesses we did have (I still maintain their cheapness and the officials are what ultimately won them the cup), but the team never really recovered from the loss and that was the end of that. (Yes, I know for a season or two following we had decent regular seasons, but the writing was kinda already on the wall.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danjr Posted March 10, 2022 Author Share Posted March 10, 2022 On 3/8/2022 at 3:11 PM, erkayloomeh said: Thank you for this thread. But could you please compile a video of our 12217 goals please. Thanks 50 years ago there was no radio let alone video. (just kidding) There were few goals scored in the early years, unless you are looking at the goals scored against us lol. That's why I love technology now, you don't miss any goals. I remember still in the late 80 and early 90's when some games had no camera's at all. I wonder if that was certain cities. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erkayloomeh Posted March 10, 2022 Share Posted March 10, 2022 1 hour ago, danjr said: 50 years ago there was no radio let alone video. (just kidding) There were few goals scored in the early years, unless you are looking at the goals scored against us lol. That's why I love technology now, you don't miss any goals. I remember still in the late 80 and early 90's when some games had no camera's at all. I wonder if that was certain cities. I know they were on radio in the early 70,s I used to lay in bed and listen to the games I had a sheet of paper I would track who scored. I think its about time for a cup. It's kind of hard to imagine ttytt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now