No, you had mentioned "Bure in his prime", I simply used Bure's best year then looked at what LaFontaine and Mogilny did during that same year.
So no, I'm not cherry picking stats.
Well...I'm a big Lafontaine and Mogilny fan but they had great chemistry together. Who did Bure have? Murray Craven? Anatoli Semenov? Bure never had the same quality linemates that a lot of the premier scorers in the league at that time.
Well...I'm a big Lafontaine and Mogilny fan but they had great chemistry together. Who did Bure have? Murray Craven? Anatoli Semenov? Bure never had the same quality linemates that a lot of the premier scorers in the league at that time.
Again, we're talking about "if's".
What if Gretzky ended up in Pitts, and Lemieux was an oiler. What if Tony Esposito was a Canadien instead of Blackhawk. What if Lindros stayed with Quebec or was a Ranger from the beginning. What if Detroit had Bure and we had Fedorov - wow!
All that really matters is what actually did occur.
What if Gretzky ended up in Pitts, and Lemieux was an oiler. What if Tony Esposito was a Canadien instead of Blackhawk. What if Lindros stayed with Quebec or was a Ranger from the beginning. What if Detroit had Bure and we had Fedorov - wow!
All that really matters is what actually did occur.
Your what ifs of players ending up on different teams isn't relevant to this. The point was that Bure had to create offense on his own with little to no help from his linemates. Find a player who put up similar numbers to Bure and played the majority of his games with 3rd/4th line type players.
According to your logic, we should disregard Bossy and Lemieux as the best goal scoring talents since they also had shortened careers and only played ~ 50 and ~200 more games than Bure.
Even with messed up knees he still managed to put up 31 goals in his final 51 games as a Ranger.
Last edited by M A K A V E L I*: 11-12-2011 at 07:18 PM.
Your what ifs of players ending up on different teams isn't relevant to this. The point was that Bure had to create offense on his own with little to no help from his linemates. Find a player who put up similar numbers to Bure and played the majority of his games with 3rd/4th line type players.
Ronning/Linden/Courtnall/Messier/Mogilny were 3rd/4th line type players???
No, not good enough! A brother doesn't count and he hasn't spoken to Gino in years - according to Odjick, anyway.
Look, Bure played with guys like Messier, Fedorov, Mogily and Larionov - among many others, he was a Ranger and there was the Gretzky rumour etc. So where are all these people speaking up for his induction - they're not! Quinn, Burke, Sather? Doesn't that tell you anything?
The little mobster can rot for all I care!
Actually Odjick was on OTR a couple years ago and said they talk all the time, and that they would be friends until "the day we die."
Ronning/Linden/Courtnall/Messier/Mogilny were 3rd/4th line type players???
Bure was injured for almost all of the season when Mogilny was playing his best hockey as a Canuck. Ronning/Courtnall/Linden were decent players as far as the Canucks go but they weren't exactly high end talent when you look at the league. Plus they didn't spend much time playing with Bure.
Messier?
All of the best goal scorers of the 90s had equally or better talented superstars to set them up. Hull had Oates. Robitaille had Gretzky. Mogilny had LaFontaine. Lemieux had Jagr/Francis.
-Very few games played (short career)
-Not a lot of hardware outside a Rocket Richard (was it 2? I forget) and a Calder
-Wasn't a big ambassador of the game (due to his personality, never liked the fishbowl)
I'd say probably these are the biggest "blemishes" holding him back. If it was based on pure skill and stats, he'd already be in.
Completely disagree.
Part of the reason you see Canuck jerseys in places all over the NHL is because of Bure.
NFL QB Sam Bradford said he became a Canuck fan because of Bure.
According to your logic, we should disregard Bossy and Lemieux as the best goal scoring talents since they also had shortened careers and only played ~ 50 and ~200 more games than Bure.
Even with messed up knees he still managed to put up 31 goals in his final 51 games as a Ranger.
Goals per game is a terrible stat to compare players. First, different eras have different offensive outputs. During the 80's goals scored was extremely high while during the 40's goals were very low.
Lastly, as I already outlined, players who had their careers cut short due to injuries will have a higher gpg.
Bossy, Lemieux and Bure are great goal scorers because they were among the best goal scorers when they played, not because they have a gpg.
Bure was injured for almost all of the season when Mogilny was playing his best hockey as a Canuck. Ronning/Courtnall/Linden were decent players as far as the Canucks go but they weren't exactly high end talent when you look at the league. Plus they didn't spend much time playing with Bure.
Messier?
All of the best goal scorers of the 90s had equally or better talented superstars to set them up. Hull had Oates. Robitaille had Gretzky. Mogilny had LaFontaine. Lemieux had Jagr/Francis.
I don't think Bure would have benefited from a playmaker. He always wanted the puck on his stick, which most playmakers if not all, want. What Bure needed was a d man to make great passes to him.
All of the best goal scorers of the 90s had equally or better talented superstars to set them up. Hull had Oates. Robitaille had Gretzky. Mogilny had LaFontaine. Lemieux had Jagr/Francis.
Exactly. Bure played with the likes of John Namestnikov at times. He won the Calder playing a lot on the second line with Dixon Ward and Anatoli Semenov. He then played with Larionov and Adams which was decent...but not what those other guys played with, that's for sure!
He also played with Murray Craven and Mike Ridley...hardly 1st line NHL playmakers.
Why does he have to be an ambassador of the game to get in? If he doesn't like the public spotlight and would rather live in his own world, so be it.
I guess Belfour was such a great ambassador with his drunkenness and police officer bribery. Same thing goes for Chelios. He's going to get in and they'll conveniently ignore his drunk driving stuff.
Why does he have to be an ambassador of the game to get in? If he doesn't like the public spotlight and would rather live in his own world, so be it.
I guess Belfour was such a great ambassador with his drunkenness and police officer bribery. Same thing goes for Chelios. He's going
to get in and they'll conveniently ignore his drunk driving stuff.
If chelios or Belfour were marginal HOF'ers their outside activities might have become factors, but they're not.
Some might question Belfour, but CHelios is automatic.
I don't think Bure would have benefited from a playmaker. He always wanted the puck on his stick, which most playmakers if not all, want. What Bure needed was a d man to make great passes to him.
He had the puck on his stick so often because he had to create his own goals since he was playing with scrubs the majority of the time. You really think if he was playing with superstars like Gretzky or Oates, he would still try to do everything on his own?
Everybody benefits from playmakers and change their game when they're playing with superstars. For example, look at Hull. When he had Oates for 3 years he scored 72, 86, and 70 goals. After Oates was gone, he never got close to these numbers again.
I don't think Bure would have benefited from a playmaker. He always wanted the puck on his stick, which most playmakers if not all, want. What Bure needed was a d man to make great passes to him.
I'm sorry but that's one of the dumbest things I've ever heard on here.
Part of the reason you see Canuck jerseys in places all over the NHL is because of Bure.
NFL QB Sam Bradford said he became a Canuck fan because of Bure.
I said it was because of his off-ice personality rather than his on-ice lore. He was never a focal marketing point for a reason, he didn't enjoy the spotlight.
He had the puck on his stick so often because he had to create his own goals since he was playing with scrubs the majority of the time. You really think if he was playing with superstars like Gretzky or Oates, he would still try to do everything on his own?
Everybody benefits from playmakers and change their game when they're playing with superstars. For example, look at Hull. When he had Oates for 3 years he scored 72, 86, and 70 goals. After Oates was gone, he never got close to these numbers again.
Hull and Bure are different players. Hull scored goals by being set up for a one timer. Bure scored his goals on the rush.
Even when Bure played with good players he still wanted the puck.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canucker
I'm sorry but that's one of the dumbest things I've ever heard on here.
If it is, prove me wrong.
Here's a small example of how Bure scored his goals, off the rush.
It's not that dumb. Bure created more of his offense off the rush more than any player I've seen play.
Just because he scored off the rush doesn't mean he couldn't have had better numbers with more talent surrounding him. It's a dumb comment.
Quote:
Originally Posted by canucksfan
If it is, prove me wrong.
Ok, you just added another dumb comment on top of your original. It's impossible to prove, but I'm not sure who would think Bure's totals wouldn't be improved with a better supporting cast. This is a pretty basic concept.
Edit: Wow....he scored all 437 goals off the rush? Astounding!
Just because he scored off the rush doesn't mean he couldn't have had better numbers with more talent surrounding him. It's a dumb comment.
Ok, you just added another dumb comment on top of your original. It's impossible to prove, but I'm not sure who would think Bure's totals wouldn't be improved with a better supporting cast. This is a pretty basic concept.
Edit: Wow....he scored all 437 goals off the rush? Astounding!
It's not impossible to prove. What type of player was Bure?
I never said Bure wouldn't improve with a better team. The early 90's Canucks had a pretty good team, something people seem to forget. What I said, and I still stand by it, is Bure wouldn't necessarily benefit from a good playmaker. However, he would have benefited greatly from a great puck moving d man.
Bure used to spend most of the game waiting for the breakaway pass. He would frequent center Ice or swoop down around his circle and prepare for the breakout. This is why he was known for his end to end rushes. Even when he played the pk, it was only so that he could be sprung for a breakaway. Relatively speaking,
he wasn't nearly as good on the pp as one might expect, because he was an "off the rush" kinda player,
not really a set play kind of guy. Vancouver coaches knew this and adjusted the style of play to suit Bure.
I know what is meant by the idea that he would benefit more from a puck moving d-man than a playmaking center.
