HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Vancouver Canucks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

2010-2011 Canucks place in Greatest NHL teams to not win the Cup

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-05-2012, 11:07 AM
  #1
MarshmontMcSlewfoot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,838
vCash: 500
2010-2011 Canucks place in Greatest NHL teams to not win the Cup

What is the consensus? That was one hell of a team. Ehroff and Edler were studs at the backline with Bieska on top of his game along with a great group of forwards. I think the D collectively gelled and you were able to outclass teams like Nashville who were better than the teams in the playoffs this year.

Only reason we won is because we were one big giant Claude Lemieux to you guys and had Chara and Seids to negate the Sedins and Bergeron to shut down Kesler. And you had Luongo who was a gift to us like a tired Brodeur is to the Kings.

The fact you had such a good season despite no offseason and a 50% Kesler (our series ended June 16 10 days after this one will) the following year with no Erhoff is proof.


The only NHL team I can come up with to not get a Cup at that level of dominance (harder to dominate in 2011 than in the past) is the 1971 Bruins with a healthy Orr inbetween the 70 and 72 Cups. Those guys are still pissed about that year.

In other sports there aren't many teams as good as the 2010-2011 Canucks out there to not win it all I can think of. NFL maybe 98 Vikings or 07 Pats. NBA not sure recently I can only think of any closest is maybe the Lakers the year they got Malone and Gary Payton. MLB recently I can think of Seattle a decade ago. Actually in all sports the only team other than 71 Bruins that was that fun to watch and dominant is College Basketball and the UNLV loss to Duke (Id put you ahead of the Fab 5 Chris Webber even though they are up there on talent.)


Amazing series and you guys are the best fans in the NHL bar none everyone I met was first class (couple drunks yelling was absolutely nothing and way less bad than Boston fans) hope you win next year if we don't I'll always like the Canucks even if I revel in the current rivalry! (NHLs version of Lakers-Celtics badblood between teams in separate conferences is definitely bad a ss!)

MarshmontMcSlewfoot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-05-2012, 11:26 AM
  #2
Mr. Canucklehead
Mod Supervisor
Kitimat Canuck
 
Mr. Canucklehead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Kitimat, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,682
vCash: 500
Solid post. I would add one more reason to why the Canucks were unable to win, and that was the devastating injuries we had throughout our lineup. A quick roll call of who was injured during that series, bolded players being hurt.

D. Sedin - H. Sedin - Burrows
Higgins - Kesler - Raymond*
Torres - Lapierre - Hansen
Oreskovich/Tambellini - Bolduc/Malhotra - Glass

Hamhuis - Bieksa
Edler - Ehrhoff
Salo - Rome*

Luongo

- We lost one of our top-six forwards, Mikael Samuelsson, partway through the 2nd round. Ryan Kesler tore the muscles right off his hip in Game 5 vs. San Jose and was literally playing on one leg for the duration of the Final. Henrik Sedin had been dealing with a major back injury all playoff long. Chris Higgins broke his foot in Round 2 versus Nashville, Christian Ehrhoff nearly dislocated his shoulder thanks to Jamie McGinn in Game 3 vs. San Jose, Alexander Edler had two broken fingers, Dan Hamhuis going down in Game 1 was a massive, massive loss, and Kevin Bieksa received a bruised MCL that hobbled him badly courtesy of a cheapshot slash from Rich Peverley to the back of his leg in Game 1 or 2. And then Aaron Rome compounded things by getting himself suspended.

The cherry on top was Mason Raymond breaking his back in Game 6.

When Sami "I got bitten by a venomous snake" Salo is your best, healthiest defensemen, you know that somewhere the hockey gods are just laughing at you.

The Bruins were certainly a great team, but IMO, if the Canucks were anything resembling healthy in that series, it would have turned out a little differently.

Mr. Canucklehead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-05-2012, 11:40 AM
  #3
Huntershin Karuk
Horvat is Horfat
 
Huntershin Karuk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Port Coquitlam, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,550
vCash: 500
Only reason we lost was injuries. If the team was as healthy as the Kings are now, we'd have dominated in a similar fashion.

The injuries allowed other teams to level the playing field and keep things competitive. It just sucks that they had to deny us yet again this year while LA is injury free.

Huntershin Karuk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-05-2012, 11:43 AM
  #4
billvanseattle
Registered User
 
billvanseattle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: bellingham
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,072
vCash: 500
I really think the Chi series hurt us. If we had won game 4, the grind would have been so much easier ....

billvanseattle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-05-2012, 11:44 AM
  #5
Timmer44
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Van City
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,204
vCash: 400
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDK View Post
Only reason we lost was injuries. If the team was as healthy as the Kings are now, we'd have dominated in a similar fashion.

The injuries allowed other teams to level the playing field and keep things competitive. It just sucks that they had to deny us yet again this year while LA is injury free.
That's on the team in my opinion. They blew a 3-0 lead on Chicago. Those 3 extra games hurt.

Hamhuis going down was the series. After that, it was done.

Timmer44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-05-2012, 11:45 AM
  #6
Mr. Canucklehead
Mod Supervisor
Kitimat Canuck
 
Mr. Canucklehead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Kitimat, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,682
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Timmer44 View Post
That's on the team in my opinion. They blew a 3-0 lead on Chicago. Those 3 extra games hurt.

Hamhuis going down was the series. After that, it was done.
The two huge crippling blows were Kesler's injury in Game 5 against SJ, and Hamhuis going down in Game 1 vs. Boston. Henrik being hobbled all playoff long was pretty brutal, but those two were our "every single situation" guys. PP, PK, last minute of a game, they were always there eating up huge minutes against top players.

I also think Samuelsson was a guy who was perfectly suited for the Final series. Big body, king of the gloved-punch, would have been right in there in those scrums driving the Bruins crazy. Sigh.

Mr. Canucklehead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-05-2012, 11:49 AM
  #7
archangel archangel
Registered User
 
archangel archangel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,181
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDK View Post
Only reason we lost was injuries. If the team was as healthy as the Kings are now, we'd have dominated in a similar fashion.

The injuries allowed other teams to level the playing field and keep things competitive. It just sucks that they had to deny us yet again this year while LA is injury free.
all teams suffer injuries. the canucks got out played by the kings. Nucks need to get more physical on the bottom 6 and the canucks have holes on the blue line

archangel archangel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-05-2012, 12:00 PM
  #8
Royal Canuck
SuperCam!
 
Royal Canuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Victoria, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,765
vCash: 50
If we didn't let Chicago force us to 7, we would've had it. That series drained us pretty good, If we rolled through them in 5 like it looked like we were, we could've had a playoff run like the Kings are having right now.

__________________

Twitter |HFBoards Contact | Blog
PSN - TBennz
"You're never a loser until you quit trying. " - Mike Ditka
Royal Canuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-05-2012, 12:03 PM
  #9
canucksfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: British Columbia
Posts: 24,768
vCash: 990
Injuries are a part of the game. Canucks had lots of injuries but if they would have finished off Chicago quicker they might not have had as many.

The Kings have had very few injuries. Ending your opposition early is a huge benefit.

canucksfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-05-2012, 01:09 PM
  #10
kevinsane
Lundqvist clone.
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Dawson Creek, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,430
vCash: 500
Classy post, CharaTriedToEatMe! Thank you!
I will always feel that had Aaron Rome played five seconds more per game, the Canucks would have a Cup.

kevinsane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-05-2012, 01:15 PM
  #11
billvanseattle
Registered User
 
billvanseattle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: bellingham
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,072
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by richard armus View Post
all teams suffer injuries. the canucks got out played by the kings. Nucks need to get more physical on the bottom 6 and the canucks have holes on the blue line
We do realize he is talking about last year .... not 2012

billvanseattle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-05-2012, 01:37 PM
  #12
hockeykid87
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 501
vCash: 500
It's easy to play the blame game to cover up loses, but I'm also a firm believer that if Hamhuis doesn't get injured in game 1, we're Stanley Cup champions. Guy was one of our few "healthy" defenseman, and then he's gone. I also didn't agree with the 4 game suspension for Rome, I though. 2, maybe 3 max.

hockeykid87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-05-2012, 01:45 PM
  #13
arsmaster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 17,036
vCash: 500
1995 Redwings were a much better team.

arsmaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-05-2012, 03:20 PM
  #14
MarshmontMcSlewfoot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,838
vCash: 500
Vancouver still dominated 1 and 2 (with Boston playing the best game they possibly could and staying in it I thought Thomas not playing just a touch better and stealing one was our undoing.)

I don't think injuries really showed in the series until or after game 5 at least. They hockey was very good and both teams obviously had injuries. B/C of Horton I put the injuries somewhat even until Raymond got hurt. But he was a backbreaker to the extent of if LeBron or Jordan fouling out/tearing an acl in the first half of an NBA finals game. Literally that big a deal (goaded off the ice no less cause if the Burrows finger thing). Recchi doesn't go out with his best game as a Bruin in his career finale with Raymond on the other line either.

(Bruins played very well in the 3 losses too but weren't the better team.)

MarshmontMcSlewfoot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-05-2012, 04:21 PM
  #15
Reverend Mayhem
CRJ + RNH = Sex
 
Reverend Mayhem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Port Coquitlam, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,271
vCash: 940
Send a message via Skype™ to Reverend Mayhem
Consider we were 3-6 in games where we could have eliminated the other team. That's a lot more travel than there needs to be. That's what made Anaheim so successful winning the Cup and that's why LA is so healthy this year, they finished their **** early and buried the teams quickly. That Chicago series needs to be done in at least 5. Nashville was incredibly lucky in game 5 of that series considering pucks went in off Edler's glove and bounced from nowhere only to find the stick of a wide-open Joel Ward.

Reverend Mayhem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-05-2012, 04:22 PM
  #16
DennisReynolds
the implication
 
DennisReynolds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,829
vCash: 500
That's life. **** happens, you can't always get what you want.

DennisReynolds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-05-2012, 04:39 PM
  #17
VinnyC
vancity, c-bus, 'peg
 
VinnyC's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Na'ē panjā
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,769
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reverend Mayhem View Post
Consider we were 3-6 in games where we could have eliminated the other team. That's a lot more travel than there needs to be. That's what made Anaheim so successful winning the Cup and that's why LA is so healthy this year, they finished their **** early and buried the teams quickly. That Chicago series needs to be done in at least 5. Nashville was incredibly lucky in game 5 of that series considering pucks went in off Edler's glove and bounced from nowhere only to find the stick of a wide-open Joel Ward.
Yeah, Nashville had some ridiculous bounces go their way. Suter making the puck bank off Luongo three times and in from behind the net with 40 seconds to go in Game 2... and then Legwand flipping the puck from behind the net and deflecting off Edler and in in Game 5... what the ****? Later, Edler has a clean swipe at the puck to clear it but it instead goes sideways right into Ward's stick, who scores.

VinnyC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-05-2012, 05:59 PM
  #18
MarshmontMcSlewfoot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,838
vCash: 500
Im going to make one more post about the series and say that I believe the Bruins losing the 3 games in the manner they did focused them (and being outplayed first period of game 3 combined with seeing Horton clocked.)

Those 3 losses were amazing hockey (fastest games of the series bad ice was noticable in boston) the only Bruins game that was close to being that good our entire playoff run was the epic Game 7 vs Tampa. So to lose 1+2 on the road when you played your 100% best on unlucky bounces despite being outplayed/outclassed by a near dominant team that you battled to keep it close all game with allowed the team to be ready to pounce when they got the breaks. Hortons injury gave momentum for the big second period in game 3, Hortons replacement scoring an early first period goal won game 4 early, and you weren't winning when Raymond went down.

I think you'll get a cup if you get Kesler a first liner with Luongo's money soon I like you against the Kings with Schneider in net instead of him, Hawks/Wings/Preds/SJ/STL may not be as good next year as they were this past year and you guys will be better automatically due to the rest.

PS- Glad realignment got blocked by the players cause we still have two games against each other this year .

MarshmontMcSlewfoot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-05-2012, 06:20 PM
  #19
arsmaster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 17,036
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharaTriedToEatMe View Post
Im going to make one more post about the series and say that I believe the Bruins losing the 3 games in the manner they did focused them (and being outplayed first period of game 3 combined with seeing Horton clocked.)

Those 3 losses were amazing hockey (fastest games of the series bad ice was noticable in boston) the only Bruins game that was close to being that good our entire playoff run was the epic Game 7 vs Tampa. So to lose 1+2 on the road when you played your 100% best on unlucky bounces despite being outplayed/outclassed by a near dominant team that you battled to keep it close all game with allowed the team to be ready to pounce when they got the breaks. Hortons injury gave momentum for the big second period in game 3, Hortons replacement scoring an early first period goal won game 4 early, and you weren't winning when Raymond went down.

I think you'll get a cup if you get Kesler a first liner with Luongo's money soon I like you against the Kings with Schneider in net instead of him, Hawks/Wings/Preds/SJ/STL may not be as good next year as they were this past year and you guys will be better automatically due to the rest.

PS- Glad realignment got blocked by the players cause we still have two games against each other this year .
I appreciate a Bruins fan trying to be nice, but really its just salt in the wound....Detroit in 1995 was better than us last year.

arsmaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-05-2012, 07:00 PM
  #20
Coconuts
Registered User
 
Coconuts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 882
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by arsmaster View Post
I appreciate a Bruins fan trying to be nice, but really its just salt in the wound....Detroit in 1995 was better than us last year.
And Detroit in 1996 was even better.

I'd give Detroit the slight but definite edge at forward, and while Osgood finished second in Vezina voting, I think 2011 Luongo/Schneider gets the edge over 1996 Osgood/Vernon, but that is debatable; they were an excellent tandem. However, they had half of the top six in Norris voting that year (Konstantinov, Coffey, Lidstrom), and that's where they can't be matched.

2002's team may have been better at least on paper, but they won it all that year.

Coconuts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-06-2012, 09:34 AM
  #21
NYVanfan
Registered User
 
NYVanfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 6,070
vCash: 500
'86 Oilers (.744 win%)
'93 Penguins (.708 win%)
'06 Wings (.756 win%)

NYVanfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-06-2012, 09:56 AM
  #22
Reverend Mayhem
CRJ + RNH = Sex
 
Reverend Mayhem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Port Coquitlam, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,271
vCash: 940
Send a message via Skype™ to Reverend Mayhem
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYVanfan View Post
'86 Oilers (.744 win%)
'93 Penguins (.708 win%)
'06 Wings (.756 win%)
Wait a minute, that's not right. '86 Oilers played 10 games and lost 4. '06 Wings were ousted from the first round in 6...I want to know where you got this information, damn it!

Reverend Mayhem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-06-2012, 10:38 PM
  #23
The Bob Cole
Ohhhh Baby.
 
The Bob Cole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Centre Ice
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,635
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reverend Mayhem View Post
Wait a minute, that's not right. '86 Oilers played 10 games and lost 4. '06 Wings were ousted from the first round in 6...I want to know where you got this information, damn it!
Regular season...?

The Bob Cole is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-06-2012, 10:42 PM
  #24
Hackeybuff*
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 299
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Timmer44 View Post
That's on the team in my opinion. They blew a 3-0 lead on Chicago. Those 3 extra games hurt.

Hamhuis going down was the series. After that, it was done.
This.

That plus also we lost game 5 vs nashville which could have helped us stay in Vancouver instead of having to go to Tennesse for game 6.

Hackeybuff* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-06-2012, 10:44 PM
  #25
Hackeybuff*
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 299
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reverend Mayhem View Post
Wait a minute, that's not right. '86 Oilers played 10 games and lost 4. '06 Wings were ousted from the first round in 6...I want to know where you got this information, damn it!
I dunno I think 86 was the first year we went to a best of 7 in the first round and I remember because the Oilers blew us away in 4 straight.

That was the (in)famous Steve Smith goal in game 7 so the Oil played 11 games those playoffs I do recall.

And yes, I do recall them.

Hackeybuff* 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 08:12 AM.

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.