Like all members of Canuck Nation, we here at Critically Canuck have suffered a long time. We will not die happily unless the Stanley Cup makes its way to Stanley Park.
Here you'll get the straight goods on our heroes. With both feet on the bandwagon, we will, however, pull no punches. As long time season ticket holders, that's our prerogative.
Expect analytical insight with a strong sense of history. We'll ask the tough questions. And answer them. Enjoy.
Ask me anythingSubmit
That, of course, is the question on everyone’s mind these days, casual fan or otherwise. And at no point in Canuck history has there been such a polarized response.
As the defending two-time President’s Trophy winners and near Stanley Cup champ two years ago, this exact team, more or less, has been recently elite and on everyone’s short list to win it all.
But based on the uneven and sometimes injury plagued play of this lockout-shortened campaign (backed only by the superlative play of Cory Schneider), the Canucks, in the eyes of many, are on target for another embarrassing first round exit.
The core personnel from the 2011 team remains intact, improved by the upgrade in goal of Schneider over Roberto Luongo and the pick-up of a legitimate second line playmaker in Derek Roy.
So on that simple basis, this team should have another shot at winning it all. And that is certainly what Canuck management would be selling you.
But you should recall last regular season wasn’t as impressive as advertised. The Canucks were bailed out consistently by their elite goaltending tandem and feasted on poor divisional opponents. The power play, that had ruled the league in 2011, was beginning to show the cracks in a foundation that would crumble completely this season.
And, of course, there was the overriding issue of lack of size and playoff grit up front - an issue that first haunted them in the Cup Final loss to Boston and was a contributing factor in last year’s early playoff exit - and one that remains unaddressed.
Mike Gillis has been quoted as saying that luck is one of the biggest components of playoff success. And he’s right. This particular version of the Canucks has been most susceptible to injury - perhaps an indictment of the Canucks’ declining depth. This team, it seems, will need more than just a little luck to get back to the promised land.
So while the memories of the 2011 near miss are most fresh in our minds, it would be wise to lower our expectations for this team - a team, that on paper, looks a whole lot more like the 2007 Canucks than they do the Stanley Cup finalists of two years past.
That team, buoyed by the other worldly goaltending of Robero Luongo, featured a veteran forward group that struggled to score (thirty-six year old Trevor Linden led the team in playoff scoring) and was bounced in the second round by the eventual Cup champion Anaheim Ducks.
Some things could happen this time around. Kevin Bieksa, Chris Higgins and Chris Tanev could get healthy and remain so. The Sedins and Ryan Kesler could resurrect their power play magic. Zack Kassian could emerge as a consistent physical, yet disciplined force. And Derek Roy just might provide second line offensive production, as advertised.
But other things will most certainly happen. The Canucks’ overall depth will be tested by the rigors of playoff hockey. The aged forward group will struggle to score, particularly at even strength. The team, as a whole, will get pushed around by bigger younger teams like Los Angeles and St. Louis. Cory Schneider will stand on his head.
You add all that up and a reasonable conclusion is another first round loss, or, if they are a little lucky, an unsuccessful trip to the second round.
This weekend’s Hockey Hall of Fame (HHOF) induction ceremonies will feature the first ever celebration of a Vancouver Canuck, Pavel Bure (we’re sorry Mark Messier and Mats Sundin don’t count). But for a franchise that has made a point in recent years of celebrating its now long but mostly tortured history, the Canucks’ home rink bears almost zero indication that the dynamic Russian Rocket ever played for the local team, despite him being the team’s first superstar and, ultimately, ”the Ruth that built” Rogers Arena. Perhaps, that is finally and rightfully about to change. It seems the HHOF induction has provided the necessary momentum for Canuck ownership to do the right thing.
The overriding criterion for admission to the Canucks’ hallowed and mostly empty retired jersey section has seemingly been about “character” - as if the Canucks have been running some bleeding heart not-for-profit all these years instead of one of the most successful franchises in the 30 team NHL. Ultimately this notion of “character” used in determining its all-time greats is down to the simple fact that for most years of its existence, the franchise had little else to celebrate.
In the team’s now long history, three players have been recognized with jersey retirement. The first two, Stan Smyl and Trevor Linden, were, more often than not, lovable losers. Plenty of pride, hustle and determination that resulted in single tragic brushes with the Stanley Cup. But neither were high-end players, never challenging for any major individual awards. Simply, players of this calibre getting their jerseys retired in any other market would be laughable. But in Vancouver, these two men, with their supposedly unquestionable character, are revered royalty.
The third member of the group, another long time Canuck captain, is Markus Naslund, who, unlike his predecessors Linden and Smyl, was one of the most skilled players of his generation. But his efforts at leadership failed quite miserably when considering the higher expectations of the early 21st century Canucks, by now a consistent Stanley Cup contender. So while he didn’t lead succesful post-season efforts, his elite level perimeter play combined with his noble community accomplishments earned him his lofty status in the organization.
Pavel Bure arrived in Vancouver in 1991 as the Canucks were rising from over 20 years of collective ashes. From his first shift as a Macaulay Caulkin fresh-faced 20-year-old in the body of a greek god, it was clear that this was something we’d never seen before – unless you wanted to time travel to the days of Fred “Cyclone” Taylor. Forget the Cyclone, it was the Russian Rocket who would finally put the Vancouver Canucks on the sporting map.
It was Bure’s explosive talent that marked the turning point for the franchise from cottage industry to global entity. In short order, the Canucks were a drawing card on the road (something that continues to this day) and a new stadium was being built (bringing with it another pro sports franchise). His full tilt brilliance catapulted the franchise to its first lengthy run of success culminating in the thrilling ’94 Stanley Cup run that prominently featured both himself and Linden. During his time in Vancouver, Bure collected several major accolades- rookie of the year award, goal scoring championships, all-star team appointments – all completely unprecedented in a market that was typically ignored by the rest of the continent.
In the end, as we all know, things got ugly. Bure had felt mistreated by management from the get-go and wanted out. In a case of “he said, she said”, the Canucks story prevailed. Bure became known as a malingering malcontent, and despite his other worldly play and contributions to the growth of the franchise, was mercilessly tossed to the trash heap of team history.
The unofficial word from the Canucks has been that Pavel wants no recognition from the franchise. But maybe he’s been waiting for an apology first. And maybe he doesn’t deserve one, who knows? But we do know the Edmonton Oilers, in the end, didn’t begrudge Mark Messier leaving for greener pastures. Nor did Patrick Roy’s most unceremonious fall from grace in Montreal prevent them from celebrating him.
Pavel has recently said that any recognition of him by the franchise is “not up to him; he has done his part.” And he has. And it was plenty. So says the Hockey Hall of Fame. And so should anyone whose ego isn’t still childishly bruised from Bure’s Vancouver exit. And so it follows that the Canucks, still scraping the egg of their face for not having done so sooner, are about to get it done. It’s about time.
To our loyal followers, please note that these entries also appear in the Vancouver Sun’s Fan Attic Blog. We will continue to maintain entries here, but encourage you to visit there and join the discussion.
We wish to thank the Hockey Hall of Fame for finally having the good sense to induct one Pavel Bure, saving us from our annual righteous rant in support of the Russian Rocket, easily the Vancouver Canucks’ most dynamic player ever and, arguably, the most entertaining player of his generation. If you wish to be enlightened further, please consult our archives.
And while his selection is most overdue, in the end, there are no levels of HHOF membership - all players enshrined are on equal footing. And make no mistake, Bure belongs. As a second generation Russian superstar, he was a pioneer for his countrymen at the NHL level, where he was simply the most electrifying player since Guy Lafleur and Bobby Orr. And like Orr, his knees couldn’t endure the full tilt of his playing style - his longevity being perhaps the only legitimate beef against his induction. And while some may question his character upon exiting Vancouver, there are two sides to every story, but Bure’s is rarely told. In the end, he scored and entertained everywhere he went, excelling both professionally and internationally. For a brief moment in time, he was the most captivating player of his sport.
Joining Bure in today’s inductions were Adam Oates, Joe Sakic and Mats Sundin. It seems that the HHOF is finally getting over its obsession with Stanley Cup winning players with Sakic being the only of this year’s inductees to have sipped from the cherished cup. And rightfully so, in the modern day 30 team NHL, there will be plenty of elite players who may never become champions. Indeed, in the era of the six team NHL, Cup rings may have meant something, but that notion is now prehistoric. And with the inclusion of Sundin and Bure, it seems that the HHOF is also getting over its bias against European players, which makes perfect sense since it is the “Hockey” Hall of Fame and not the “NHL” Hall of Fame.
With Bure’s induction, the Canucks once again find themselves with egg on their face as it relates to their franchise’s first and best superstar. How can the team’s only bonafide Hall of Famer (sorry, Mark Messier and Mats Sundin don’t count) not have his number hanging from the rafters while the likes of career plumber Stan Smyl is so enshrined? Some sources may say that Bure has been offered such an honour (or at least inclusion in the lower tiered Ring of Honour), but has refused. This is entirely possible, but also irrelevant. The hanging of a number from the rafters is much less about awarding the player, but recognizing his impact to the franchise and its fans. Yes, Pavel wasn’t necessarily the model community citizen, but he put the Vancouver franchise on the sporting map, making himself and his team an international brand. Stan Smyl or Trevor Linden or Markus Naslund could never have done that. And if the Canucks had retired his number (even without him attending the ceremony) before he had entered the hall, they would have looked a whole lot better than they do now, where any official acknowledgement of his career will look like after the fact pandering.
The irony of all this, of course, is that Pavel’s induction was announced by Pat Quinn, whom Pavel has now claimed as a father like figure, but was possibly part of the reason for Bure’s requested exit from Vancouver. Meanwhile, here in Vancouver, current President and General Manager Mike Gillis (Bure’s former agent) issued a very brief press release jointly recognizing Bure and Sundin, who played only half a season here in what was easily Gillis’ strangest move…
With last week’s stunning acquisition of young hulking winger Zack Kassian in exchange for prized rookie Cody Hodgson, the Canucks are about to add another chapter to a long running story in Vancouver: the quest for the perfect power forward.
This story has its beginning, of course, with Cam Neely, who would become the prototype for the very term. Except the Canucks didn’t know it. And gave him away for Barry Pederson, a playmaking centre who had been a BC junior hockey star and twice a 100 point scorer for the Boston Bruins. Though at the time of the 1986 trade, he had the use of roughly one arm and was a shadow of his former self - though still good enough to lead the pitiful Canucks in scoring. Meanwhile, Neely became the NHL’s definitive power forward and hockey hall of famer despite a career that was tragically cut short by injury.
Since that devastating and memorable loss, Vancouver has had more misses than hits to replace what Neely was never able to provide in Vancouver, but did so effectively in Boston.
Indeed, since the 1983 draft that produced Neely, the Canucks have burned six first round picks on big men up front. There was one hit, Trevor Linden. And several misses - Rob Murphy, Shawn Antoski, Alek Stojanov and the most lamentable Libor Polasek. And there was Jim Sandlak, who seemed to have the game, but just not the gumption on most nights.
The Canucks, since the Neely disaster, have actually had better success trading away big men than keeping them. Linden became Todd Bertuzzi - who, while a Canuck, was the best power forward in the game. Bertuzzi, the power gone from his game after the Steve Moore incident, became Roberto Luongo. Stojanov, of course, became Markus Naslund. And even Sandlak was good enough for Murray Craven, a key player on the 1994 Final team.
And when the Canucks weren’t drafting big men, they were passing on some they rightly should have nabbed. And while second-guessing draft picks is a ridiculously simple and unfair game, there are a few instances that are notable in their sheer idiocy. Two picks after the Canucks selected J.J. Daigneault, who approached the 1984 draft table on crutches, Calgary selected Gary Roberts. And of course, failing to nab local boy Milan Lucic, who was playing in their own backyard for the WHL Vancouver Giants, before the Bruins got him in the 2nd round of the 2006 draft is a slight that will not be forgotten by many.
In Canuck lore, the broad shoulders of Trevor Linden almost carried the team to its first Stanley Cup. And the dominant play of Todd Bertuzzi helped return the Canucks to an elite team before a tragic ending. And, of course, the loss to Boston in last year’s Final has been blamed, by many, on a lack of toughness on the top lines.
So while the quest for the perfect big man continues with the acquisition of Kassian, none of this legacy should matter. We doubt he’s a Canuck historian. But it will likely matter to the rabid fan base, who have too much misery in memory.
When news of the trade first broke, it seemed to catch most by surprise - even the supposed hockey insiders - which causes one to worry if the Canucks had done their best to auction Hodgson to the highest bidder. But it would seem given the Canucks’ now apparent long running drama with the Hodgson camp, that they likely had this deal in the works for quite some time and had their sights particularly set upon Kassian. So while this trade may be evaluated on the longer term performances of both players, the trade of a blue chip asset in Hodgson only increases the pressure on Kassian to contribute now.
And so it goes. Another big man in Vancouver. With pressure to fulfill a prophecy often promised, but rarely fulfilled.
From the rain tortured slopes of the North Shore mountains, we interrupt our ark building to revisit a topic we covered this past summer; that is this Saturday’s ceremony to officially retire Markus Naslund’s number 19. With this esteemed honour, Naslund will join fellow long time Canuck captains Trevor Linden and Stan Smyl as the only players to have their jerseys hoisted to the rafters.
This induction has been a somewhat divisive proclamation amongst the Canuck faithful, some referring to Saturday’s ceremony as simply “Markus Naslund Sham Night” - the best opportunity for a season ticket holder to dump a regular season seat for a healthy profit.
It is easy to argue that Naslund does not belong in the company of Smyl and Linden simply because as a leader he did not accomplish the post season success that they did. Nor did he embody their workman-like heart and soul; qualities that are typically more likely to win over the adoration of the fan base in this market.
But after Pavel Bure, he was the Canucks next bonafide superstar, or at least, perennial all-star. For a good number of seasons, he was the best left winger in hockey during the height of the dead puck era. By winning a Lester Pearson award, he was clearly respected by his playing colleagues throughout the league.
Perhaps most importantly to those making the induction decision, he was a classy fellow who put his community obligations first and foremost. He was a genuinely nice guy it seemed; so much so that he was able to befriend the certifiably gruff Todd Bertuzzi.
We say that retiring Markus’ number is lowering the bar. With induction being limited to only Smyl and Linden to date (as opposed to skill players like Bure or, even, Thomas Gradin), a premium has been historically placed on leadership and playoff success.
As we all know, Naslund’s teams were perennial playoff busts. And his fans will argue that Markus can’t be held responsible for the fact that his goal-keeper couldn’t stop a beach ball when it mattered most. And that’s fair.
But here’s the thing; leaders lead. Or at least good ones do. Markus did not. In fact, when it came to crunch time, Naslund, being the intelligent and sensitive man that he was, wilted under the pressure. How do we know this? How can we prove this? Well, since Naslund was not a physical player nor an old school holler guy, his opportunity to lead was through his goal scoring talent. So what do you remember?
When you think of clutch goal scoring in Canuck history, you think of Pavel Bure, Geoff Courtnall, Greg Adams, Brendan Morrison, Trevor Linden, Mattias Ohlund and Daniel Sedin. Naslund does not even enter the discussion.
In fact, what you remember about Naslund, the goal scorer, is wrist shots from the sideboards on the power play. You remember him forgetting the puck at centre ice during a shootout. You remember his coach being so afraid to use the team’s highest scoring player ever that he typically found his ass nailed to the bench during the tie-breaking session. Can you imagine that happening to Trevor Linden, who despite a declining skill set, was still such a valuable clutch player that he became a most successful shootout specialist in his latter years?
Forget for a moment about what we might remember, what do the stats tell us? Well, the stats tell us that Naslund lit it up against inferior opponents. On a point-per-game basis, the teams he was most successful against were Atlanta, Columbus, Toronto, Anaheim, Edmonton and Nashville - hardly a collection of the league’s elite. And his post season line? A paltry 33 points in 45 games and a minus 9.
Really, what was Markus Naslund’s defining moment? For too many, it was the “we choked” apology speech after a stretch drive collapse that cost them a division title. Or no less memorably, the Steve Moore elbow to the head that cued best friend Todd Bertuzzi’s side show that still lingers over this franchise and this great game to this day.
When you get right down to it, Naslund was not a heroic figure that deserves celebration, but more likely a tragic figure that draws our sympathy.
And in the sorry history of this franchise, perhaps that’s enough. But what it really means is that the bar it now lowered to include skillful players with great regular seasons, and nothing more.
And if it is, then what about Pavel Bure? Our first, and arguably only, superstar (not to mention, likely Hockey Hall of Famer). And then surely what about the twins? Another season or two of regular season dominance followed by playoff failure should be enough to enshrine them, too? And before you know it, our rafters will look like Molson Centre but missing the most important piece - a single Stanley Cup playoff banner.
As a side note, we find it interesting that the Toronto Maple Leafs have yet to retire Mats Sundin’s number. It’s a pretty easy argument to make that he mattered more to Leaf Nation than Naslund ever did to ours.
In the end, we can passively accept the Naslund induction on the very simple premise that this franchise has had so little to honour, though it only means that our campaigning for Pavel Bure will continue in earnest. Can you guess the topic of our next blog entry?
As part of the Canucks’ 40th anniversary celebrations, there will be four inductees into what is being referred to as the “Ring of Honour”, which is meant to honour those who fall short of jersey retirement (limited so far to Stan Smyl, Trevor Linden and, shortly, Markus Naslund).
So far two players have already been inducted: original Captain Canuck, Orland Kurtenbach and Captain Kirk (the most successful Canuck goalie to date), Kirk McLean. It’s difficult to find fault with either of these selections, who clearly fall short of jersey retirement status but were both integral players in Canuck history.
Kurtenbach had a reputation as one of the genuinely toughest guys of his generation and led an expansion crew, that at the very least, was tough to play against. And while he played only a mostly injury plagued four seasons with Vancouver and despite not having an official capacity with the team since a brief coaching stint in the late 70’s, he has often been an ambassador for the team.
McLean, of course, was one of the key players (arguably the most valuable player) of the famed ‘94 near Cup squad. But while this moment in time certainly stands as his high water mark, he was a consistently strong netminder, and really, the first Canuck goalie to achieve a long run of high calibre backstopping.
So that brings us to the question on the minds of the long term faithful, who else should be rightly honoured? As stated, there will be two more inductees this season and those within the organization who know have been sworn to secrecy.
The elephant in the room, of course, is Pavel Bure. How his number is not being retired before the likes of Markus Naslund, is simply stated, a typically Canuck conundrum - an issue we covered in great detail here this summer. He will almost certainly be inducted in the Hockey Hall of Fame in due course and be the only true Canuck representative in hockey’s hallowed shrine.
On this basis alone, you’d think one day his number will hang from the rafters at Rogers Arena, after he’s paid whatever penance the club sees fit for holding his breath until he was shipped out of town. So it follows that he’s above and beyond the “Ring of Honour”. Or at least, he should be.
But putting aside the Russian Rocket for now, who else is worthy in the “Ring of Honour”?
Well, if it were up to us (as it should be), we would allocate this year’s two other inductee spots to Harold Snepsts and Thomas Gradin.
Our man Harold logged the most games of any Canuck defender ever and was as tough as they came. And damn it, we’re prepared to forget about the pass to Mike Bossy with two seconds remaining in overtime in Game 1 of the ‘82 Stanley Cup Final. Indeed, despite that blunder, Harrrrrr-ollllllllld was arguably the biggest fan favourite in this town and always a menacing presence on the back end, something that today’s squad is often lacking. And it certainly helps that he has recently returned to the Canuck operation as part of the scouting crew.
When Thomas Gradin arrived in Vancouver as the best of the Swedish contingent that Jake Milford was pioneering in the NHL, his world class skill was immediately obvious; mostly because we’d never seen anything like it from a guy in a Canuck uniform. In the end, when he left Vancouver, he was the franchise point leader and had made plumber Stan Smyl a point per game player. Like Snepsts, he has been a member of the Canucks’ scouting crew for a few seasons and is solely responsible for the drafting of Alex Edler (who happens to sport Gradin’s number 23).
So what’s your take? In the end, it’s your “Ring of Honour”.
Today, “The Hockey News” (“THN”) released their ranking of the all-time top 10 Canuck players (thanks to valued reader Steve M. for the heads-up). These listings are never without controversy and while it’s easy to quibble about placing, what’s most important is did they get the right 10? Of course, “The Hockey News” are hockey experts, but they’re not really Vancouver Canuck experts. Thankfully, we are. Below we’ve listed their rankings with our predictably candid commentary.
10. Harold Snepsts- If you’ve been around here any length of time, you’ll know of our undying man crush love for Harold. As such, you’ll get no arguments here. For all you youngsters out there, Snepsts logged more games on defense than any other Canuck defender and was legendarily tough. If he had played this past season, there would have been no pissing and moaning about what Dustin Byfuglien was up to. And remarkably (though a truer measure of the Canucks’ ineptitude than anything else), he played in two NHL All-Star games.
9. Tony Tanti- We got to see this guy play every home game as an impressionable youth back in the day and while he was durable and a most dependable scorer, he played in the highest scoring era ever and got to play along side silky smooth Patrik Sundstrom. On that basis, he wouldn’t make our top 10. His ‘82 Camaro does though.
8. Kirk McLean- At this point, he’s the all-time franchise leader for many goaltending categories and until Roberto Luongo can come up with a lengthy (Stanley Cup Final) run of his own has every reason to be on this list. Poor Kirk was never the same after Jeff Brown slept with his wife. Or was it after McLean stole Bruce Allen’s wife? Yes, before Tiger Woods, there was Kirk McLean. And Jeff Brown.
7. Mattias Ohlund- As the all-time highest scoring defender, it’s hard to argue against his inclusion on this list. Even more so when you combine that with his feared hitting ability. We will quibble about him being more highly ranked than Snepsts though.
6. Stan Smyl- It’s no surprise that “Steamer” is on this list as the first Canuck to have his jersey hung from the rafters. Some would argue that he should be ranked higher based on his heart and soul contributions, but his offensive numbers are likely inflated due to the high scoring era in which he played.
5. Markus Naslund- As the third nominee for roster retirement and all-time leading scorer, this one is a no-brainer. Given his lack of playoff success, we are okay with him being ranked in the middle of the top 10.
4. Daniel Sedin - It’s hard to believe that Henrik and Daniel now rank 6th and 7th respectively in all-time games played and 4th and 6th respectively in points. On this basis, it’s hard to argue their inclusion in the top 10, but without any significant playoff success, this ranking seems a little high.
3. Trevor Linden - Johnny Canuck. A class act. And often overlooked as one of the best clutch players of his generation.
2. Henrik Sedin - See Daniel.
1. Pavel Bure- Duh. You know our thoughts on the Rocket, probably ad nauseam. This selection again reinforces the idiocy of his exclusion from the retired jersey club. Seriously, if an objective hockey expert from “The Hockey News” sees fit to name him as the greatest Canuck ever, why can’t the damn franchise do the same?
So it seems we are generally happy with THN’s top 10 (seeding aside) save the Tony Tanti selection. It’s hard to imagine a top 10 list that doesn’t include Thomas Gradin, who after Pavel Bure and perhaps the Sedins was the most skilled player ever to play for this sorry squad. If not Gradin, then original Canuck Andre Boudrias deserves more consideration than Tanti. During the Canucks’ first run at respectability in the mid 70’s he was their leading scorer. Another possible replacement for Tanti could be defensemen Doug Lidster, who was shipped out of town just before the ‘94 Cup run (luckily for him to the Cup winning Rangers), but was the best defensemen on the team for the decade leading up to that point.
Some are whining about no Todd Bertuzzi. Really? This is top 10 Canucks, not top 10 Malcontents. Bertuzzi could have been top of this list if he’d embraced the opportunity to be the best power forward of his generation instead of sulking and complaining all the while getting paid a kings’ ransom to play a kids’ game. And some old schoolers will complain that the exclusion of Richard Brodeur is unforgivable. But objectively speaking, aside from the famed ‘82 Cup run and his lovable persona, his numbers weren’t that good. He does host a fine golf tournament though.
We look forward to your takes on this. Who do you think should be in and out?
Now that we are officially 100 posts old, it’s time to celebrate with a little walk down memory lane to the darkest days of Canuck history. Enjoy the ride, but watch your back - the Moose is on the loose.
Three years removed from their brush with brilliance (the famed 1994 run to the Stanley Cup Final), by the summer of 1997 the Canucks had seemingly become perpetual underachievers, having not advanced beyond the 2nd round since ‘94 and missing the post season entirely in the spring of ‘97. Despite adding speed and skill with the likes of Alexander Mogilny, Markus Naslund and Russ Courtnall to an already deep group of forwards, the Canucks just couldn’t seem to gel. And after a 1996 summer dance that almost netted them Wayne Gretzky (save a poorly judged late night phone call ultimatum), the Canucks were determined once again to find the missing piece to the puzzle.
When it was announced that the Canucks had managed to lure Mark Messier away from New York (and his pal Gretzky), the delirious faithful were all but planning the parade route. After all, Messier was the “greatest leader in professional sports”. And despite being 36 years of age at the time, was only one season removed from a near 100 point season. And really, no one was expecting him to light it up, but only lead this skilled but possibly uninspired squad. And he was the best at that, right?
Upon arriving in Vancouver, Messier’s first move was a sign of things to come - an act that was light on leadership but heavy on ego. By 1997 the Canucks’ 27 year history was marred by mediocrity with a couple of heroic, some might say fluky, runs to the Stanley Cup Final every decade or so. This tradition, or lack thereof, was evidenced by the fact that only one jersey was hanging from the rafters (plumber Stan Smyl) and only one other was retired (Wayne Maki, a young skilled winger who died tragically from brain cancer while still on the active roster). Messier thought so little of this precious little tradition that he took it upon himself to contact the Maki family and request their permission to un-retire Maki’s #11. Placed in this most uncomfortable position, the family relented. And the Moose was only getting started.
Before the start of the much anticipated regular season, incumbent Canuck captain (and Johnny Canuck himself) Trevor Linden respectively gave up the captaincy to the legendary Messier. It wasn’t long before Linden regretted the move. As the dressing room camaraderie changed for the worst, the team struggled mightily from the get go and by early November had lost 10 straight games. This ineptitude cost President and GM Pat Quinn his job and shortly thereafter coach Tom Renney was also out. And in was Messier’s previous partner in crime, Mike Keenan.
At this point, the local faithful were completely stunned. Pat Quinn, after all, was the man that had finally brought respectability and stability to the franchise. The arrival of Messier was supposed to be the icing on the cake of the most successful chapter in franchise history, not the dawn of a new era. However, if we’d been able to distance ourselves from the furor, we’d have seen a pattern emerging.
Let’s flashback to Messier’s arrival in New York where the Rangers finished first overall in his first season with veteran coach Roger Nielson at the helm. In his second season in the Big Apple, a power struggle erupted between the two, with Messier leading a mutiny that remarkably left the Rangers out of the playoffs and Nielson out of a job. You all know who the replacement was. Yes, Iron Mike. And the result of course, too. That damn ‘94 Stanley Cup.
In Vancouver, as was his calling card, Keenan quickly began his mind games, particularly with Kirk McLean, who apparently did not impress Keenan with his fitness level. Despite suffering only one overtime loss in the first six games of the Keenan era and McLean stopping 92% of his shots during that period, he was yanked at the first sign of trouble in his seventh game, after allowing 2 goals on 9 shots. Seven starts and 3 Keenan hooks later, his days as the starting goalie were over, commencing Vancouver’s status as a goalie graveyard.
McLean along with heart and soul grinder Martin Gelinas (who played his best hockey here and never wanted to leave) were quickly dealt. And weeks later, Trevor Linden after being repeatedly shamed by Keenan was mercifully dealt, too.
With that the house cleaning was complete and a new era dawned. An era that featured horrid defensive play and inconsistent efforts from the offensive stars. Despite all the optimism of the pre-season, it became clear (at least to those watching) that the franchise was commencing on yet another rebuilding project. The logic of having this squad led by a washed up hall-of-famer eating up quality minutes was seemingly lost by those now in charge.
Throughout this period, the official word from the team and from players was what a fantastic leader Messier was and how much he was teaching the team. Future captain, Markus Naslund often credited Messier‘s influence. Via the media however, the Messier sound bites were pathetically laughable. To the loyal fan base, the charade was sickening and, in very short order, season ticket holders were leaving in droves.
As potentially crippling to the franchise as the Messier era was, it was blessedly brief. In reasonably short order, the ownership group would see the error of having given the keys of the car to the diabolical Keenan (and, perhaps, Messier), hiring Quinn apprentice Brian Burke to oversee the team. Burke after toying with Keenan briefly, inserted Marc Crawford. And within a year, the young team appeared poised to become a playoff contender once again. Of course, by the time the Canucks did make it back to the post-season, Messier, Moose size ego still intact, had retreated back to New York for a final three years of futility.
In the end, the Messier era in Vancouver can be looked upon in a manner of ways. Some will say it tragically marked the end of the most successful era in team history. Others will say it planted the seeds for future success (Linden became Bertuzzi and McCabe who became Luongo and one of the Sedins; the futility of the team in Messier’s second season got them the other Sedin). The truth, of course, is somewhere in the middle. Clearly, the team that Messier joined, despite having some great offensive talent, had a defensive core (McLean, Jyrki Lumme, Dana Murzyn, Dave Babych) that suddenly had their best days behind them. And of course, to credit Keenan and/or Messier for what Burke and Dave Nonis were ultimately able to do with future trades and draft picks is ludicrous.
Ultimately, Messier left a bad taste in the mouth of the Canucks’ faithful. Whether the quality of the supporting cast was overrated, he seemingly had his fingerprints all over the exits of many of the most popular Canucks ever. This could have all been forgiven had things worked out differently then or since. But with hockey in Vancouver, things always seem to work out the same…
Trust Mike Gillis to give us something else to do on a glorious summer day. In case you missed it, at yesterday’s annual season ticket holder reception, it was announced that the Canucks plan to retire the jersey of Markus Naslund this season as part of their 40th anniversary celebrations.
We find this to be a most interesting development.
There is no doubting Naslund’s accomplishments as an elite NHL player:
the Lester Pearson Award (now the Ted Lindsay Trophy - the ultimate measure of respect from a player’s peers)
the 3 appointments to the NHL First All Star Team
the Art Ross trophy near misses
the Canucks scoring leader for seven seasons
the Canucks all-time scoring leader
Further, there is also no doubting that he was a class guy whose community contributions could not be questioned.
Mike Gillis maintains that the team has now defined criteria for jersey retirement and that Naslund had “all the attributes we’re looking for”.
This is where we get lost a little in the logic. Presumably, Trevor Linden and Stan Smyl both had these same attributes, too, since their numbers are already hanging from the rafters. Like Naslund, both Linden and Smyl embraced their community commitments. Unlike Naslund, they were not highly skilled players; in fact, if you were to draw up a list of the Canucks’ most “talented” players, they would not be at the top of that list. Like Naslund, both Linden and Smyl had lengthy runs as team captain. Quite certainly, it was their leadership ability that was the most crucial element to their jersey retirement.
So what can be made of Markus’ leadership ability? Well, when the accolades were flowing yesterday, there no was mention of it. And while he captained this team for their most consistent stretch of regular season success, when it came to crunch time, his team repeatedly self destructed. In Naslund’s defense, it’s not his fault that Dan Cloutier whiffed on Niklas Lidstrom’s one-hopper or that Marc Crawford lost the team or that Todd Bertuzzi lost his mind. But truth be told, Markus wasn’t a clutch player. Who can forget the “we choked” apology speech after the Canucks crapped the bed down the stretch handing the division title to Colorado? Or Naslund’s unbelievable ineptitude to score in shoot-outs (him leaving the puck at centre ice on one attempt still makes us cringe). Seriously, it got so bad that his coaches had little option but to nail his ass to the bunch for the circus shootout that you’d expect to be the modus operandi of a highly paid skilled winger.
It was always our opinion that the weight of the captaincy crushed Naslund. He was a sensitive intelligent player so much so that the enormity of THAT responsibility in THIS market was too much to bear. And some will say that’s not his fault; he didn’t make himself captain. And that’s true. But when the prodigal son (and Captain Canuck, Trevor Linden) returned from exile, Naslund had the opportunity to hand over the captaincy (as Trevor had unselfishly gifted to Mark Messier). He did not.
There is no question that there is an alarming discrepancy between the post season successes of the teams led by Smyl and Linden. For whatever reason, that’s seemingly no longer a crucial element to selection for jersey retirement. And to the extent that Naslund can’t necesarily be held accountable for the rest of his team, that’s certainly reasonable. But leaders lead? Don’t they? And are accountable for their troops when they fail?
In the end, we suppose we can get our heads around Naslund’s number hanging from the rafters. Although his leadership ability is not meeting the threshold of those before him, his tangible accomplishments are hard to argue; certainly in the relative history of the franchise. Add to that, he was, from all accounts, a nice guy. His befriending of the certifiably gruff Todd Bertuzzi ample evidence of that.
This, however, opens the inevitable can of worms. If Naslund is in, then why not Pavel Bure? As our upcoming post will unequivocally demonstrate, Pavel is a Hall of Famer. And as the Canucks only bonafide HHOF’er (or at the very least, the only bonafide HHOF candidate), it only follows that his number should be in the rafters, too. And on that basis, before Naslund. And if the Sedins (like Naslund) never advance beyond the second round of the playoffs but continue to earn the same regular season accolades, then their numbers should be there too, right? Mike Gillis says he’s not in the jersey retirement business. Now he is.
As you would expect, things got a little heated in Round 2 of our little game determining the “toughest” Canuck ever. We will commence with Round 3 on Monday. And promise to pick-up the pace. This will end long before training camp.
Here’s a quick recap of Round 2 results:
1. In our most controversial match-up, Trevor Linden barely out pointed Ron Delorme. You, valued reader, turned out in droves to vote on this one, which featured many lead changes and was basically a split vote from start to finish, with Trevor edging out Chief by the narrowest of margins. So clearly the broad definition of toughness wins out. For now.
2. In another ridiculously close encounter, Stan Smyl bested linemate Curt Fraser by a single vote. Clearly, Smyl’s enduring legendary status in this town provided him with the momentum to get past the more dangerous Fraser.
3. In a battle of top defensemen, Harold Snepsts, easily out voted Ed Jovanovski. We applaude your discerning taste.
4. And in a match that should have never happened, Gino Odjick pretended Mattias Ohlund was the St. Louis Blues, with a most logical conclusion.
Thanks for playing. Round 2 featured a record number of votes; we can only hope you’ll hang around for Round 3 (starting Monday).
