Cliff Ronning

[GMR]

Don't hear him mentioned often here. Looking at his last two seasons in the WHL, this guy was a scoring machine.

1984 - 71GP, 136 points
1985 - 70 GP, 197 points

Despite these numbers, he was drafted in the 7th round! Was this just a SIZE thing? He was listed at 5'8, 170 lbs, which likely means he was even smaller. Maybe a product of a horrendous draft year for GMs. Same draft where Hull, Robitaille and Suter were selected very low.

Pretty good NHL career. Not a star player, but a great playmaker to have. Over 1100 games played. 869 points. I'd take that on my team.

He was traded four times in his career (and never for a good return). He numbers show he produced in St. Louis, Phoenix and Nashville. I'd be curious to know why those teams traded him for such minimal returns?

It's probably safe to say he'd thrive better in today's NHL, where there's less stigma around smaller players. Also, the game is more wide open.

 

[Doctor No]

Loved him in Vancouver - I don't know if Cherry ever actually said this in one of the Rock 'Em Sock 'Em videos, but whenever I think about Ronning, I hear "Little Cliffie Ronning" in Cherry's voice.

 

[GMR]

Loved him in Vancouver - I don't know if Cherry ever actually said this in one of the Rock 'Em Sock 'Em videos, but whenever I think about Ronning, I hear "Little Cliffie Ronning" in Cherry's voice.

Vancouver fleeced St. Louis to acquire him, Courtnall and Momesso. What a trade that was.

However, why didn't Vancouver re-sign him? He certainly had a lot still left.

 

[MS]

Vancouver fleeced St. Louis to acquire him, Courtnall and Momesso. What a trade that was.

However, why didn't Vancouver re-sign him? He certainly had a lot still left.

They let him go to free up money and the roster spot to sign Gretzky and then when that fell through they ended up with neither.

Huge mistake as Ronning had terrific chemistry with Mogilny the previous year and Mogilny never had a decent C the rest of his stay in Vancouver.

 

[Vector]

They let him go to free up money and the roster spot to sign Gretzky and then when that fell through they ended up with neither.

Huge mistake as Ronning had terrific chemistry with Mogilny the previous year and Mogilny never had a decent C the rest of his stay in Vancouver.

Also, you know, the home town kid who loved playing in front of his family.

 

[Dingo]

very talented. always felt like he tailed off every year, likely due to getting beaten around all the time. im not sure that that is statistically true, but i felt that way watching then.
much like Ray Whitney regarding draft position vs actual talent... only, it wasnt a stigma about smaller players - they really, truly had a harder time then than now.
I would think that Ronning, Whitney and Palffy would range from Gaudreau to Pat Kane levels of success if they came along 5 years ago.

 

[Terry Yake]

the fact that ronning put up the point totals he did playing in the 80s and DPE is impressive as hell given his size

if he had entered the league after the 05 lockout he would've been a superstar most likely with the speed he had

 

[JianYang]

Someone mentioned Ray Whitney earlier. Ronning did resemble him in some ways. Both guys also stayed productive in their late 30s, although Whitney probably had better numbers.

Ronning didn't really play with offensively dangerous teams in his later years though, and I do remember him looking crafty with lemaire's wild team, which was his 2nd to last year in the league.

Any small guys who played through the 90s, and had a long career should never be overlooked for how much they beat the odds. That era was not built for them, so just that fact alone carries alot of weight for me.

 

[Dingo]

Someone mentioned Ray Whitney earlier. Ronning did resemble him in some ways. Both guys also stayed productive in their late 30s, although Whitney probably had better numbers.

Ronning didn't really play with offensively dangerous teams in his later years though, and I do remember him looking crafty with lemaire's wild team, which was his 2nd to last year in the league.

Any small guys who played through the 90s, and had a long career should never be overlooked for how much they beat the odds. That era was not built for them, so just that fact alone carries alot of weight for me.

whitney, who came along later, actually had his numbers go up with the rule changes in 2005, though he was past prime. this speaks volumes about the necessity for size in the 90s.
ronning never had the chance to play in the new rules (on the other hand he did get some years pre trap..... still no good being that small, but the raw numbers look better)

 

[FerrisRox]

Don't hear him mentioned often here. Looking at his last two seasons in the WHL, this guy was a scoring machine.

1984 - 71GP, 136 points
1985 - 70 GP, 197 points

Despite these numbers, he was drafted in the 7th round!

Ronning had already been drafted *before* the 197 point season.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

one of my absolute favourite players of all time.

i remember when we got him, i knew who courtnall and momesso were, but had no idea about ronning or dirk. and i was like, cliff ronning, i bet he's a big bruiser. i mean, that is a really butch name right?

and then we got this tiny little sparkplug who looked like bryan adams. he seriously took linden to a new level and immediately. courtnall was great too, but that first stretch after the traded deadline, and especially in the playoffs, ronning was the man on that line.

ronning scored 6 goals and 12 points in the last 11 games of the regular season. for reference, courtnall had 6 goals, 8 points, but 5 of the goals and 7 of the points were in the last 7 games. linden had 5 goals and 15 points in those 11 games. (up to the trade, mostly on a line with dan quinn and dave capuano, linden was on pace for a 32 goal, 64 point season; he ended up hitting 70 point plateau for the first time in his young career.) for reference, the canucks hadn't had a point/game scorer in three years, since tony tanti in the '88 season, and hadn't had a point/game center since patrik sundstrom in '84.

in the two games before the big trade, we lost to montreal 7-1, then chicago 8-0. we didn't get a lot better after the trade, but we went 4-5-2, which was way closer to .500 than before (24-38-7).

the difference between making and not making the playoffs was our two games against winnipeg in the last week of the season. we won both and got the bottom seed in the smythe, with winnipeg finishing two points below us. we won the first game 3-1, with momesso scoring two goals, two assists from linden, including the assist on courtnall's EN to seal it. the second game, which was the literal last game of the season because it went to overtime and we are on pacific time, was tied 2-2 at the end of regulation. the tying goal in the third period was ronning, assisted by linden. courtnall from linden and ronning in OT to win it.

but then oh man, the playoffs. we were up against LA in the one seed, with gretzky, robitaille, sandstrom, granato, a still good dave taylor, steve duchesne, rookie rob blake, and then totally hardened playoff ringers in larry robinson, john tonelli, and steve kasper, who was actually by far the best of their ringers and arguably LA's second best player in that series.

game one

1st Period
02:20	VAN		Dave Capuano (1)	Sergio Momesso, Petr Nedved
07:00	VAN		Igor Larionov (1)	Sergio Momesso, Trevor Linden
08:33	LAK		Tomas Sandström (1)	Wayne Gretzky
10:42	LAK		Bob Kudelski (1)	Mike Donnelly, Steve Kasper
19:40	VAN		Geoff Courtnall (1)	Cliff Ronning
2nd Period
06:01	LAK		Wayne Gretzky (1)	Tomas Sandström
06:39	LAK		Steve Kasper (1)	Mike Donnelly, Bob Kudelski
14:59	LAK		Luc Robitaille (1)	Todd Elik
3rd Period
05:00	VAN		Geoff Courtnall (2)	Cliff Ronning, Trevor Linden
09:30	VAN		Geoff Courtnall (3)
17:29	VAN		Cliff Ronning (1)	Geoff Courtnall, Tom Kurvers

[TBODY] [/TBODY]
[TBODY] [/TBODY]

game two

1st Period
10:35	VAN	PP	Tom Kurvers (1)	Dave Capuano, Sergio Momesso
2nd Period
00:31	VAN		Cliff Ronning (2)	Geoff Courtnall, Trevor Linden
02:47	LAK	PP	Rob Blake (1)
3rd Period
03:13	LAK		Luc Robitaille (2)	Todd Elik, Steve Duchesne
1st OT Period
11:08	LAK		Wayne Gretzky (2)	Tony Granato, Tomas Sandström

[TBODY] [/TBODY]
[TBODY] [/TBODY]

game three

2nd Period
00:41	VAN	PP	Cliff Ronning (3)	Geoff Courtnall, Jyrki Lumme
3rd Period
11:53	LAK		Wayne Gretzky (3)	John Tonelli, Brian Benning
1st OT Period
03:12	VAN		Cliff Ronning (4)	Dana Murzyn, Geoff Courtnall

[TBODY] [/TBODY]
[TBODY] [/TBODY]

then LA ran away with game four 6-1. but then gretzky made it not a series midway through game five. series tied 2-2, game tied 4-4 —

1st Period
04:50	VAN	SH	Jyrki Lumme (1)	Trevor Linden, Jay Mazur
08:52	LAK	PP	Luc Robitaille (3)	Rob Blake, Larry Robinson
13:59	VAN		Cliff Ronning (6)	Trevor Linden, Jyrki Lumme
16:48	LAK	PP	Luc Robitaille (4)	Wayne Gretzky, Steve Duchesne
19:01	LAK		Mike Donnelly (2)	Rod Buskas, Larry Robinson
2nd Period
01:37	VAN	PP	Jyrki Lumme (2)	Geoff Courtnall, Cliff Ronning
05:57	VAN	PP	Gerald Diduck (1)	Doug Lidster, Trevor Linden
06:25	LAK		Steve Duchesne (2)	Dave Taylor, Todd Elik

[TBODY] [/TBODY]
[TBODY] [/TBODY]

and in the second half of the second period, gretzky picks up two assists on two unanswered kings goals, gets an assist on the EN to seal it.

LA takes the series in game six, which was tied 1-1 going into the third, before dave taylor scored the go-ahead goal at the halfway mark of the period, then two empty netters by the checking line of donnelly, kasper, kudelski.

in the end, the only three plus players on the canucks were ronning, courtnall, and linden.

No.	Player	Pos	Age	GP	G	A	PTS	+/-	GW
7	Cliff Ronning	C	25	6	6	3	9	1	2
10	Geoff Courtnall	LW	28	6	3	5	8	2	0
16	Trevor Linden	RW	20	6	0	7	7	3	0

[TBODY] [/TBODY]
[TBODY] [/TBODY]

but then gretzky was gretzky

No.	Player	Pos	Age	GP	G	A	PTS	+/-	GW
99	Wayne Gretzky	C	30	6	4	6	10	1	2

[TBODY] [/TBODY]
[TBODY] [/TBODY]

long story short, that was the beginning of the legend of little cliffy ronning on the canucks.

edit:

and on the other end, it felt super fitting that twelve years later, it was little cliffy ronning coming back from 3-1 and eliminating the best naslund/bertuzzi team. and just to be clear, ronning was the player who beat us. he scored two goals in game five, including the 2-1 PP marker at the beginning of the second with naslund in the box to start minnesota's unanswered five goal run, then assists on all three third period goals in game six to turn a 2-0 game into a 5-1 game. he and wes walz led all scorers in those last three games of that series, while naslund had zero goals, two assists and bertuzzi had one single point.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

as for his actual height, a quote from theo fleury back in the '91 season: "[to reporters] i'm not the shortest guy in the league anymore. cliff ronning, i could eat my lunch off the top of his helmet."

 

[hacksaw7]

Played with a lot of fire and intensity. Reminded me of Fleury though he was a bit bigger and less physical...and not quite as good a pure scorer as Theo was (Ronning wasn't really the stocky/strong type) but was a very good skater, good playmaker.

Also one of those guys generously listed at 5'8. Don't think he was that tall

 

[GMR]

Ronning had already been drafted *before* the 197 point season.

Good point. That would have raised his draft stock a little if he were drafted in 1985.

 

[Sam Pollock]

Good point. That would have raised his draft stock a little if he were drafted in 1985.

Quite a bit because the 1985 draft wasn't as deep as the 1984. I'm thinking at least a 2nd rounder, maybe a late 1st?

 

[The Panther]

Very skilled player who fans loved because he (like Fleury) was quite fearless. The difference, though, is that Fleury won several of his physical battles while Ronning basically lost them all, but then again that just made him look more fearless.

However, I have the impression that in the playoffs he tended to start out hot and then fade when the going got tough. (This is not uncommon for smaller or softer players.) Is my theory right? Let's check:

1991 vs. L.A.
-- 4 goals and 6 points in the first three games (!), including an OT winner, and then 3 points (-2) in the last three. So, not bad, although he didn't manage to produce any points in the elimination game six. L.A. was a good club then and it's quite likely this series would have been shorter if Ronning/Courtnall hadn't been on fire in games one to three.

1992 vs. Winnipeg & Edmonton
-- Canucks needed 7 games to shake Winnipeg: Ronning pointless in the first five, then scores six points in the last 2 games (+5) to guide the Canucks to the win.
-- Six-game loss to Edmonton: Ronning has multi-goal games in games 2, 3, and 5, and seven points overall, so you can hardly fault him.

1993 vs. Winnipeg & L.A.
-- 6 games to shake the rookie-Selanne Jets: Ronning has points in every Canucks' win, including 2 points in the final game.
-- 6-game loss to L.A.: Ronning has points in four of the six, with five points overall.

1994 vs. Calgary, Dallas, Toronto, NY Rangers
-- Ronning has three points in the first 2 games, then zero-points and an ugly -9 in the final 5 games. This appears to be a series the Canucks won (barely) in spite of Ronning, not because of him.
-- Ronning has three points across back-to-back games in the middle of this 5-game series, though doesn't score in the final two.
-- Ronning has two points in 5 games (and only 1 point in Canuck wins), so again it appears he wasn't a major factor.
-- Ronning has seven points in the 7-game loss to NYR: He also goes +4, which is pretty darn good.

1995 vs. St. Louis & Chicago
-- Ronning scores seven points in the 7-game win over the Blues (all in the final 5 games).
-- Ronning fails to score a point in the 4-game loss to the Hawks (Canucks scored only six goals all series!).

1996 vs Colorado
-- Ronning picks up just two assists in the 6-game loss.


In conclusion, my theory was mostly wrong. Ronning was a pretty consistent playoff point-producer for the Canucks from 1991 to 1994, and he only really fell off a bit against the Blackhawks in '95 and then against Cup-champ Colorado in '96.

What's noticeable, though, is that the Canucks had their greatest success (1994) when Ronning was a bit less productive. Obviously, their team depth was key, and when Ronning was more of a supporting offensive producer, they were in good shape. But when he was depended on to carry the team, the burden was a bit too much. That's not a knock on him, though, and his production in these years is pretty darn impressive.

 

[Buffalowing1988]

I spent the beginning of 1997 in Phoenix as a kid for my dad's work and remember quickly getting attached to that little core of Ronning/Tkachuk/Roenick. Looking back, that's a pretty nice trio to have with Tverdosky and Numminem chipping in from the blueline as well. The 1997 quartefinals against Anaheim was a Millennial kid's dream. I wonder how things would have unfolded if Ronning had stuck around for that one additional year or two instead of being sent off in 1999. He was so crafty and complemented the other guys to a tee.

 

[Terry Yake]

Played with a lot of fire and intensity. Reminded me of Fleury though he was a bit bigger and less physical...and not quite as good a pure scorer as Theo was (Ronning wasn't really the stocky/strong type) but was a very good skater, good playmaker.

Also one of those guys generously listed at 5'8. Don't think he was that tall

i'd guess he was 5'6. 5'8 on skates

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

They let him go to free up money and the roster spot to sign Gretzky and then when that fell through they ended up with neither.

Huge mistake as Ronning had terrific chemistry with Mogilny the previous year and Mogilny never had a decent C the rest of his stay in Vancouver.

i think one thing this tells us is that mogilny was at his best with someone who could skate, pass, and think on his level. the best mogilny seasons are '92-'94 with lafontaine, '96 with ronning, 2001 with gomez, and the one exception is 2003 on the leafs.

but in general, when he was with a slower puck dominant center who wasn't a little buzzsaw, it was diminishing returns. sundin, old messier, turgeon.

i just looked into his 2003 season and it's interesting. he seems to have been taken off sundin's line in november and december of that year and his production was basically exactly the same as it was all year. from what i can tell, antropov centered mogilny and tucker (and sometimes someone named paul healey), and sundin was with renberg and tom fitzgerald. sundin's production in those two months was also identical to his usual production. which suggests that quinn probably was best served separating them and each having their own lines, because nothing was added by loading up one big line.

which brings us back on topic: it's maybe not a coincidence that the most successful pat quinn canucks team was with ronning on the third line, with momesso and gelinas. centers were to GM quinn what goalies were to brian burke, and that team was plagued by never having enough centers to go around (although this is also partially nedved's fault for not yet developing into someone you could count on, as well as quinn counting on him without a contingency plan). having ronning center his own line instead of loading up that wonderful courtnall/ronning/linden line made us a lot more dangerous.

 

[Staniowski]

Ronning was small, feisty, with very good skills. An excellent puck carrier and distributor. His skating was mixed - quite quick, agile....but his normal stride wasn't very fast.

A couple notes about guys like Ronning...i.e. guys who weren't very big, and weren't speed demons:

These guys have often not been given a fair chance at all levels of hockey....in minor hockey, in junior, AHL, etc., NHL....there are always doubts about whether they can compete at the next level up....

And, in the NHL, they (and certain other types) are sometimes deemed easily replaceable....there can be some truth to this, but it's not always easy to replace guys who can score, even if they have their faults. It depends....

 

[Big Phil]

You can always use a guy like Cliff Ronning on your team. Sort of like Jonathan Marchessault. You can't go wrong.

 

[VanIslander]

Ronning rarely backchecks.

He circles like a vulture at center ice.

So I often said. I was at Pacific Coliseum when he was booed and Larionov was cheered. (Our family had free tickets to home games until '95 - a couple of years later Burke demanded paid seats or else empty seats as a policy.)

Nonetheless, outside of live games in the arena, fellow B.C.ers loved Ronning's personality. A more friendly version of Yashin imo. A loser, competitively speaking.

 

[VanIslander]

A good comp for Cliff Ronning is Marc Savard, in terms of likeability and impact on a franchise, not considering regular season vs. playoff season split.