ukcanuck wrote:This just in:
Brown Man Wears Rose Coloured Glasses.
Wtf not even close.. Where are the 9...9... Nine, 10 -1 = 9 future hall of game players???
not to mention future coaches and managers to come from that squad...
In fact the 2010/11 Canuck doesn't make the top 15 teams on that list and arguably shouldn't be on any greatest all time list whatsoever.
During the 70's, parity was a lot less than it is in the modern era, but that's besides the point. All I'm saying is this: that 2011 Canucks team had 117 points, and ranked #1 in every single statistical category that year. Period. To downplay the significance of just how good that 2011 team is just flat out ignorant. You're right that the 2011 Canucks team aren't Top 15 in the all-time list, but again..........name any other team in the modern era that dominated every single category in a given year.
A large part of your argument is that the Canucks were a perimeter team that whined and dived their way to getting an inordinate number of power play goals............and yet they had the #1 PK that year. Go figure.
They fucking lost the Stanley cup because they were not fucking good enough
It wasn't injuries, it wasn't officiating, it wasn't luck, they played too many games they didn't need to play because They couldn't win when it counted most, and had nothing left by the second period of game 6...end of story...
Again - that's just wrong........and flat out disrespectful. THEY WON 15 GAMES IN THE POST-SEASON THAT YEAR!
Yes, they were ultimately not good enough.......but they lost by one friggin' game!
And you are wrong - by downplaying the significance of injuries to Kesler, Raymond, almost all of our defensemen, etc., you are being very disrespectful. You are extremely ignorant, or are flat out trolling here.
And as for this bullshit that the rot has only set in this year...
]The writing was on the wall when that 2011 Stanley cup final team finally won game 8 in Boston and got their moral victory and promptly sucked from that point on....Nothing but a whimper against the Kings and even less against the sharks last year.
The Canucks still won a mass majority of their games in 2012 after the Boston game even if their play was lackluster at times. Yes - a Presidents' Trophy doesn't mean a whole lot, but the fact of the matter is that they garnered 112 points and won the trophy for a 2nd straight time. And no - they didn't just stockpile points against their weak division. Their record against non-NW teams at the time was almost as impressive.
In the playoffs that year, they simply ran into a Cup Winning Kings team that was sizzling.
Even though we didn't have Daniel for the first 3 games, the Kings flat out beat us fair and square that year.......and absolutely destroyed the competition that year.
Bottom line? There is no evidence to suggest that the Canucks tanked directly after the "Boston victory" in 2012.
I would argue that our loss to the Kings in 2012 + the Luongo drama, was what lead to the players losing faith and subsequently, contributed to the rapid downfall.
We've been mediocre ever since.
This team has had too many soft players and not enough heart from top to bottom
The style of play they excelled at doesn't stand up in the playoffs without guts.
You can't say that about a team that came within ONE game of winning a cup! Ridiculous.....
To coins phrase, too many milk drinkers, not enough whiskey drinkers.
In 1998, the Canucks had a shitload of whisky drinkers in Donald Brashear, Bert Robertson, Larry Courvelle, Enricco Cicconne, etc., etc. They were probably tougher than the Boston Bruins or today and probably would have 'held their ground' in a street fight against the Broadstreet Bullies! (Hilariously enough).
Do you know what the record of the Canucks were between 1998-1999?
Best to have a good combination of whiskey drinkers and milk drinkers.