HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The History of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
The History of Hockey Relive great moments in hockey history and discuss how the game has changed over time.

Why didn't Messier work out for the Canucks?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-07-2013, 10:12 AM
  #26
digdug41982
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 26,474
vCash: 50
Pretty simple. The Canucks absolutely sucked. Messier didn't play his best but had little to work with.

digdug41982 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 11:06 AM
  #27
the edler
Inimitable
 
the edler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 2,580
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by coldsteelonice84 View Post
Messier didn't play his best but had little to work with.
Little to work with?. Bure, Mogilny, Näslund. That's a decent bunch of wingers.

the edler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 11:20 AM
  #28
digdug41982
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 26,474
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by the edler View Post
Little to work with?. Bure, Mogilny, Näslund. That's a decent bunch of wingers.
You post those names and it looks good but Bure was only there one year before getting traded. Mogilny was hurt half the time. Decent, I guess but that was literally all they had. Guys like Bill Makault were playing in the top 6.

digdug41982 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 01:16 PM
  #29
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 40,951
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by the edler View Post
Little to work with?. Bure, Mogilny, Näslund. That's a decent bunch of wingers.
Markus Naslund at least gave Messier a lot of credit:

Quote:
"I think my biggest influence has been Messier," says Naslund. "Watching him prepare for games and how seriously he still took everything at his age. A lot of the qualities that he had helped me get better."
http://www.nhl.com/intheslot/read/in...lund/main.html

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 02:21 PM
  #30
moog35
Registered User
 
moog35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,108
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leafsdude7 View Post
Kirk McLean and Trevor Linden were both traded early in Messier's first season.
McLean was traded on January 3rd 1998 so about half way through the season. He started 29 games with a record of 6-17-4 and a league high GAA of 3.68 and a SV% of .879 so he was playing brutal. Linden was traded after McLean so neither were traded early and by the time they were traded the damage had already been done on their playoff hopes

moog35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 04:35 PM
  #31
CharlestownChiefsESC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Laurence Harbor NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 151
vCash: 500
Instead of blaming Messier why dont the Canuck fans blame John McCaw. I am a RANGER fan and #11 is my favorite player of all time, but Ill be a realist here. In 96-97 Messier scored 36 goals however 32 of those goals came close to the beginning of the season. He only scored 4 goals the rest of the season. In the playoffs he had a decent series against Florida, but he was a ghost against the devils and philly. After that season he RANGERS offered him 1 year at what I believe was 4 million. I cant really blame Neil Smith for doing this especially because 2 of the best players in the game at the time were free agents (Sakic,Fedorov) and he was looking towards the future in which Messier would only diminish. What Canucks fans also dont seem to understand was the Red Wings, Caps, and Isles also offered him the same money the RANGERS did, while McCaw offered him this exuberant amount that no one other should be getting at age 36. So instead of complaining about Messier's skill (which was beginning to diminish), why dont you blame your owner for signing a 36 year old to a crazy contract.

CharlestownChiefsESC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 04:52 PM
  #32
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 40,951
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlestownChiefsESC View Post
Instead of blaming Messier why dont the Canuck fans blame John McCaw. I am a RANGER fan and #11 is my favorite player of all time, but Ill be a realist here. In 96-97 Messier scored 36 goals however 32 of those goals came close to the beginning of the season. He only scored 4 goals the rest of the season. In the playoffs he had a decent series against Florida, but he was a ghost against the devils and philly. After that season he RANGERS offered him 1 year at what I believe was 4 million. I cant really blame Neil Smith for doing this especially because 2 of the best players in the game at the time were free agents (Sakic,Fedorov) and he was looking towards the future in which Messier would only diminish. What Canucks fans also dont seem to understand was the Red Wings, Caps, and Isles also offered him the same money the RANGERS did, while McCaw offered him this exuberant amount that no one other should be getting at age 36. So instead of complaining about Messier's skill (which was beginning to diminish), why dont you blame your owner for signing a 36 year old to a crazy contract.
Ohh, I remember something like this. Anyone have the exact stats?

I also remember he seemed like something of a shell of himself in the 1997 playoffs. Those Rangers upset the Devils because of Mike Richter, Wayne Gretzky, and Devils coach Jacques Lemaire getting caught with his pants down and unable to adjust to the Rangers counter-trapping the trapping Devils.* Messier wasn't the dominating force that he usually was, especially in the playoffs.

*Edit and the fact that Bill Guerin and Steve Thomas couldn't keep their freaking skates out of the crease, when that stupid rule was in effect.


Last edited by TheDevilMadeMe: 02-07-2013 at 05:03 PM.
TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 04:59 PM
  #33
quoipourquoi
Moderator
Goaltender
 
quoipourquoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Hockeytown, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 3,644
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Ohh, I remember something like this. Anyone have the exact stats?

I also remember he seemed like something of a shell of himself in the 1997 playoffs. Those Rangers upset the Devils because of Mike Richter, Wayne Gretzky, and Devils coach Jacques Lemaire getting caught with his pants down and unable to adjust to the Rangers counter-trapping the trapping Devils. Messier wasn't the dominating force that he usually was, especially in the playoffs.
Don't have the stats, but I think the back spasms he started getting in February had a lot to do with it.

quoipourquoi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 05:11 PM
  #34
CharlestownChiefsESC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Laurence Harbor NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 151
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Ohh, I remember something like this. Anyone have the exact stats?

I also remember he seemed like something of a shell of himself in the 1997 playoffs. Those Rangers upset the Devils because of Mike Richter, Wayne Gretzky, and Devils coach Jacques Lemaire getting caught with his pants down and unable to adjust to the Rangers counter-trapping the trapping Devils.* Messier wasn't the dominating force that he usually was, especially in the playoffs.

*Edit and the fact that Bill Guerin and Steve Thomas couldn't keep their freaking skates out of the crease, when that stupid rule was in effect.
He was on a tear in February and scored a hat trick against the isles in a saturday afternoon game on fox. But from what I remember soon after he got hurt in practice and was ineffective mostly after that. I will admit that he was ok in the first round vs Florida but that was really it. PS: Leetch was also a beast in the playoffs along with Gretzky and Richter.

CharlestownChiefsESC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 06:23 PM
  #35
vadim sharifijanov
Rrbata
 
vadim sharifijanov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 9,915
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Markus Naslund at least gave Messier a lot of credit:



http://www.nhl.com/intheslot/read/in...lund/main.html
on the other hand:

Quote:
''I was never going make the kind of impact Mess does because I was never going to be the physical force he is,'' Naslund said shortly after becoming captain. ''In his last year here, a lot of players were scared to say anything in the locker room with Mark in the room. To me, the best way to improve a team�s chemistry is through give and take.

''And while I was in awe watching Mario, I was young," he said. "What I learned most from him is that Mario has something that not a lot of people have. He doesn't think he ever is going to fail. When you always have that approach, that you're going to make it, that you are going to make a difference, the mind is a pretty powerful thing.''
and

Quote:
''Markus learned how to use his skills by watching Mario Lemieux and he learned to be more focused and more competitive by watching Mark Messier -- two pretty good leaders I�d say,'' Bertuzzi said. ''I wouldn�t say he was in a shell before Mess left to go back to New York (following the 1999-2000 season), but we needed someone to step up and take charge of this team -- and Markus did not hesitate.
on that second one, when bertuzzi says "i wouldn't say he was in a shell before mess left" i'm guessing what he really means is "he was [and the rest of us also were] in a shell before mess left."

funnily enough, the source is the same: http://www.nhl.com/intheslot/read/in.../blossoms.html


but even if it's true that naslund learned how to be a captain and how to play with intensity from messier, naslund was a terrible captain and leader. quiet, gutless, maddeningly passive, and almost never stepped up when he had to, unlike, say, prime messier, who of course was everything you'd want in a leader. naslund was a ridiculously skilled scorer, yes. but as a captain.... if he learned how to be the guy that carries the team on his back and to come up big when his team needed him to from messier, messier did a crappy job of mentoring him.

vadim sharifijanov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 10:09 PM
  #36
mrhockey193195
Registered User
 
mrhockey193195's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 3,524
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
My take is that Messier himself thought he was still a superstar, and he acted as such. All the "my way or the highway" stuff that Vancouver fans complain about is exactly what Messier did in New York, and it worked beautifully there. My opinion is that by the time Messier got to Vancouver, his skills were eroding, but by that point his ego had been so built up, he refused to realize it, and he no longer had the skills to back up his demands.
Absolutely. This pretty much sums it up. The last person on the planet to realize that Mark Messier was no longer a superstar was Mark Messier.

As much as I love the man, that's really what caused him and his teams to struggle in the last seven years of his career. It certainly was a large fault of his, but I don't think it really diminishes his reputation and legacy as much as others do.

mrhockey193195 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 10:44 PM
  #37
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,058
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Markus Naslund at least gave Messier a lot of credit:



http://www.nhl.com/intheslot/read/in...lund/main.html
This is true and we often hear Naslund saying things like this. One has to wonder though if it is in part because Naslund was such a classy captain as was Smyl and Linden. There is little doubt that Moose ranks below these 3 guys as Canuck captains.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 11:04 PM
  #38
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,058
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlestownChiefsESC View Post
Instead of blaming Messier why dont the Canuck fans blame John McCaw. I am a RANGER fan and #11 is my favorite player of all time, but Ill be a realist here. In 96-97 Messier scored 36 goals however 32 of those goals came close to the beginning of the season. He only scored 4 goals the rest of the season. In the playoffs he had a decent series against Florida, but he was a ghost against the devils and philly. After that season he RANGERS offered him 1 year at what I believe was 4 million. I cant really blame Neil Smith for doing this especially because 2 of the best players in the game at the time were free agents (Sakic,Fedorov) and he was looking towards the future in which Messier would only diminish. What Canucks fans also dont seem to understand was the Red Wings, Caps, and Isles also offered him the same money the RANGERS did, while McCaw offered him this exuberant amount that no one other should be getting at age 36. So instead of complaining about Messier's skill (which was beginning to diminish), why dont you blame your owner for signing a 36 year old to a crazy contract.
John McCaw and his sidekick Stan McCammon, was a horrible ownership group to be sure and he has to take the blame for insisting on the Moose signing but that doesn't let Moose off the hook about being more concerned about his ego rather than the hockey team.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 11:21 PM
  #39
Nalyd Psycho
Registered User
 
Nalyd Psycho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: No Bandwagon
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,890
vCash: 500
He had no chemistry with our wingers. He was slow and both our snipers, Almo and Bure required speed on their lines. And his pride prevented him from playing a role that suited his skill set. He believed he was still the Messiah.

__________________
Every post comes with the Nalyd Psycho Seal of Approval.
Nalyd Psycho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 11:38 PM
  #40
CaptPantalones
Registered User
 
CaptPantalones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Buffalo, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 4,376
vCash: 500
Hed have been such a nice addition to the Sabres 99 Cup run had that trade ever gotten finished

CaptPantalones is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-08-2013, 12:28 AM
  #41
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 40,951
vCash: 500
Heh, I never thought of it that way, but teaching Markus Naslund how to be a captain might not be saying much, considering the type of captain Naslund turned out to be!

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-08-2013, 12:47 AM
  #42
Ogopogo*
 
Ogopogo*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,214
vCash: 500
Because a 36 year old cannot take a terrible team from the sewer to glory by himself.

Ogopogo* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-08-2013, 12:49 AM
  #43
Ogopogo*
 
Ogopogo*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,214
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
John McCaw and his sidekick Stan McCammon, was a horrible ownership group to be sure and he has to take the blame for insisting on the Moose signing but that doesn't let Moose off the hook about being more concerned about his ego rather than the hockey team.
Canuck fans

Ogopogo* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-08-2013, 01:05 AM
  #44
Kershaw
 
Kershaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Country:
Posts: 25,519
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eddytheeagle20 View Post
how is 60 points in 78 games for a guy whos in his late 30s a bad thing it vancouver fault for thinking he could be a top line guy at that point in his carrer
This.

It's like Columbus offering 16mil to Jagr for 2 years right now and single handily expecting him to steer the ship of an inept franchise.

Kershaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-08-2013, 03:55 AM
  #45
GWOW
Two Pucks, One Cup
 
GWOW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 15,410
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leafsdude7 View Post
Kirk McLean and Trevor Linden were both traded early in Messier's first season.



I was talking more generally about the Canucks than about Keenan/Messier. Keenan was a large part in the shake up of the Canucks in the late 90s, a shake up that saw most of the core group and leaders go and undeveloped youngsters come in. The fact that Messier was surrounded by few solid veterans probably contributed to both his and the teams lack of success.

That said, the fact that the pairing of Keenan/Messier worked before doesn't mean Keenan wasn't directly responsible for it not working again.
I was talking about his first season there.

GWOW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-08-2013, 06:31 AM
  #46
JetsAlternate
Registered User
 
JetsAlternate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,902
vCash: 500
Mark Messier was not a good player for the team at all. I'd argue he was one of the reasons the team struggled. He was not a good fit for the team, he did not seem interested in playing the way he did previously in New York, and the controversies surrounding him were distracting to the team.

This was when the goaltending graveyard began for the Canucks, and many of the team's core players were traded during Messier's first year. Throughout the next few years, the team was rebuilding with the beginnings of what would become one of the strongest rosters in the early 2000s. Messier became the leader of this young group consisting of Ohlund, Naslund, Bertuzzi, Aucoin, McCabe, Jovanovski/Hedican, Klatt, May, etc. Players such as Steve Staios, Dana Murzyn, Bure, Linden, Odjick, Gelinas, and Lumme had all been replaced by the middle of Messier's tenure in Vancouver. Alexander Mogilny, meanwhile, played there until the midway point of Messier's last season, when he was traded for Brendan Morrison.

This was a transition period for the Canucks, and Messier was caught in the middle. He certainly did not help the team with his performance, though, frequently demonstrating himself to be lazy and disinterested. His play factored into the team's struggles, though some of it is due to the young core in Vancouver throughout most of his tenure as well as the carousel of goaltenders in the 2.5 years after McLean's departure (Artus Irbe, Sean Burke, Garth Snow, Corey Hirsch, Kevin Weekes, Felix Potvin, Corey Schwab). It's not that he just wasn't "as good as he was before" -- his play was detrimental to the team's success. As the team's top-line center, he led the team towards the bottom of the NHL standings.

The Canucks did steer themselves in the right direction by Messier's final season, bringing in Andrew Cassels as the team's top centerman; Cassels scored more points that year (62) than Messier had in any of his three years in Vancouver. Cassels, meanwhile, was a +8 that year while Messier was last in the team's +/- rankings with a -15. Brendan Morrison contributed 9 points in his 12 games with Vancouver that year as well, helping the team at center during the final stretch of the season. If anything can be attributed to the Canucks nearly reaching the playoffs that year, it's the gradual improvement of the team's young players, as well as the acquisition of Cassels. Messier often dragged down the team's top line and was more suited to play a lesser position.

Many Canucks fans call this the "dark age" of Canucks history, having fallen from the grace of the early 1990s, though finding redemption in the early 2000s. The moniker is not only because of the team's on-ice performance, but also because the putrid ownership group at the time and the financial instability of the franchise. The Griffiths family had lost its share of the team as a result of their financial contributions to the construction of GM Place; John McCaw, meanwhile, was an incredibly shadowy figure, making fans question his intentions with the team. He moved the Grizzlies and did not seem interested much in the Canucks. It was a tough time for Canucks fans. Mark Messier became the on-ice representation of the team's failures during that period.


Last edited by JetsAlternate: 02-08-2013 at 07:07 AM.
JetsAlternate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-08-2013, 09:25 AM
  #47
Ogopogo*
 
Ogopogo*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,214
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JetsAlternate View Post

Many Canucks fans call this the "dark age" of Canucks history, .
Haha. Maybe those not old enough to have lived through the 70s and 80s.

Ogopogo* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-08-2013, 11:50 AM
  #48
CharlestownChiefsESC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Laurence Harbor NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 151
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptPantalones View Post
Hed have been such a nice addition to the Sabres 99 Cup run had that trade ever gotten finished
First time im hearing this. Tell me more. Also if you look at the teams that were interested I dont see him being any better anywhere else except for maybe Detroit, but then he would have been reduced to take a lesser role.

CharlestownChiefsESC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-08-2013, 12:04 PM
  #49
eddytheeagle20
Registered User
 
eddytheeagle20's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: New Brunswick
Country: Canada
Posts: 353
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlestownChiefsESC View Post
First time im hearing this. Tell me more. Also if you look at the teams that were interested I dont see him being any better anywhere else except for maybe Detroit, but then he would have been reduced to take a lesser role.
detriot red wings where future hall of famers finish their careers

eddytheeagle20 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-08-2013, 12:18 PM
  #50
vadim sharifijanov
Rrbata
 
vadim sharifijanov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 9,915
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JetsAlternate View Post
Mark Messier was not a good player for the team at all. I'd argue he was one of the reasons the team struggled. He was not a good fit for the team, he did not seem interested in playing the way he did previously in New York, and the controversies surrounding him were distracting to the team.

This was when the goaltending graveyard began for the Canucks, and many of the team's core players were traded during Messier's first year. Throughout the next few years, the team was rebuilding with the beginnings of what would become one of the strongest rosters in the early 2000s. Messier became the leader of this young group consisting of Ohlund, Naslund, Bertuzzi, Aucoin, McCabe, Jovanovski/Hedican, Klatt, May, etc. Players such as Steve Staios, Dana Murzyn, Bure, Linden, Odjick, Gelinas, and Lumme had all been replaced by the middle of Messier's tenure in Vancouver. Alexander Mogilny, meanwhile, played there until the midway point of Messier's last season, when he was traded for Brendan Morrison.

This was a transition period for the Canucks, and Messier was caught in the middle. He certainly did not help the team with his performance, though, frequently demonstrating himself to be lazy and disinterested. His play factored into the team's struggles, though some of it is due to the young core in Vancouver throughout most of his tenure as well as the carousel of goaltenders in the 2.5 years after McLean's departure (Artus Irbe, Sean Burke, Garth Snow, Corey Hirsch, Kevin Weekes, Felix Potvin, Corey Schwab). It's not that he just wasn't "as good as he was before" -- his play was detrimental to the team's success. As the team's top-line center, he led the team towards the bottom of the NHL standings.

The Canucks did steer themselves in the right direction by Messier's final season, bringing in Andrew Cassels as the team's top centerman; Cassels scored more points that year (62) than Messier had in any of his three years in Vancouver. Cassels, meanwhile, was a +8 that year while Messier was last in the team's +/- rankings with a -15. Brendan Morrison contributed 9 points in his 12 games with Vancouver that year as well, helping the team at center during the final stretch of the season. If anything can be attributed to the Canucks nearly reaching the playoffs that year, it's the gradual improvement of the team's young players, as well as the acquisition of Cassels. Messier often dragged down the team's top line and was more suited to play a lesser position.

Many Canucks fans call this the "dark age" of Canucks history, having fallen from the grace of the early 1990s, though finding redemption in the early 2000s. The moniker is not only because of the team's on-ice performance, but also because the putrid ownership group at the time and the financial instability of the franchise. The Griffiths family had lost its share of the team as a result of their financial contributions to the construction of GM Place; John McCaw, meanwhile, was an incredibly shadowy figure, making fans question his intentions with the team. He moved the Grizzlies and did not seem interested much in the Canucks. It was a tough time for Canucks fans. Mark Messier became the on-ice representation of the team's failures during that period.
to me the canucks' dark ages are everything between the opening of GM place (the failed mogilny + bure experiment) and when luongo came over (which also coincides with the sedins taking over as the go-to scorers from naslund). but those of you who follow my posts probably all know how i feel about the nastuzzi era.

the late 90s teams were indeed terrible, with or without messier. with a better dressing room culture, could they have annually contended for and sometimes make the playoffs only to be bounced in the first round like the post-lockout calgary flames? maybe. the talent was there. but is that any kind of team to cheer for?

as has consistently happened with the canucks since i started following the team the year larionov and krutov came over, the younger generation and older generation didn't overlap in any meaningful way (except maybe right now? #kassian #schneider #schroeder #dreaming).

whether or not linden, bure, mclean, and the other stars of '94 sucked or were injured or were slumping when messier got there (you could include the other star, mogilny, as well), the depth that made the '94 team so great was almost completely gone. timely scoring from adams and geoff courtnall (both unbelievably clutch)? gone. diduck was gone, ronning was gone, lumme and babych were on their way out (and had massively declined anyway), i have no idea what happened to gelinas' game that year before he was traded (but unfortunate because he would have been a consummate keenan guy if he hadn't been dumped so soon after keenan replaced renney)...

ohlund was a rookie, aucoin was an awkward PP specialist, corey hirsch turned out to be terrible, naslund wasn't ready yet, and drafting through the 90s had generally been bad. if we'd gotten more from the '90-'93 drafts, we could have at least augmented the '94 group in '95 and '96 before they all fell off a cliff.

but by the same token, the naslund/bertuzzi years were also plagued by terrible goaltending, a complete lack of second and third line scoring depth, and seasoned veteran defenders playing at a high level. pat quinn struck gold in the early 90s, getting an entire scoring line (courtnall, ronning, and big mo) from st. louis for garth butcher while also picking up diduck, lumme, and babych for almost nothing. they added three contributors, including an excellent PP QB, without losing a single roster player at the deadline that year. as much as i love bure, captain kirk, and linden, '94 happened because of depth players-- second liners scoring clutch goals, guys who were second liners on most teams on the third line, five top four defensemen plus journeyman brian glynn playing out of his mind.

which is all to say, messier was right about one thing: '94 was a fluke. not that the team overachieved as messier was implying, but getting that group together was best case scenario after best case scenario for pat quinn. grinding that same group down to just those stars by '97/'98 was a grave misunderstanding of what he'd accomplished earlier in the decade. and his successor brian burke never seemed to understand how to build that kind of winning team either (big stars, mostly crap for depth, garbage for goaltending).

vadim sharifijanov is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:55 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.