Podcast (Audio) Mike Keenan - SportsLit

[HairyKneel]

Guy was a clown. Pat Quinn built this team from the ground up.

And then Quinn was asleep at the wheel. He was pissed at the new ownership after he had hired his buddy Rick Ley to coach the team and then he had to fire him. Then they hire the idiot Tom Renney, he hung onto guys like Babych, Murzyn, McLean and several others until they had no value.

I'm a Quinn guy from 87-95. But he deserved the boot in 97. Sure they had Almo, but Bure wanted out long before Keenan got here. Linden's play was cratering. They let Diduck walk, Ronning too.

Quinn built it, then he let it rot.

 

[Tim Calhoun]

Benning was just incompetent as a GM. Keenan (& Messier) was a poor excuse for a human being.

I know this is off topic, but don’t get Benning off the hook for being a bad person and chalk it up to being incompetent (which he was). Benning’s selfishness and ego hurt the franchise for much longer than Messier and Keenan ever did.

 

[bandwagonesque]

Mike Keenan made a few good trades that set the team up well for the next several years under different coaching and management, and whatever credit is due for that he can have.

Mike Keenan also methodically alienated nearly all of his players in the most bitter, silly, dysfunctional ways imaginable then basically checked out because he was too chickenshit to allow himself to understand he was responsible for it. Reading an organized account of it would have anyone in near-disbelief.

 

[MS]

The worst thing I can say about someone involved with this team is that 'they made me embarrassed to be a fan of the Vancouver Canucks'.

This really only applies to Keenan/Messier and to Jim Benning. And some of Donald Brashear's antics were right up there.

 

[bandwagonesque]

The worst thing I can say about someone involved with this team is that 'they made me embarrassed to be a fan of the Vancouver Canucks'.

This really only applies to Keenan/Messier and to Jim Benning. And some of Donald Brashear's antics were right up there.

And the whole team in general between about 1975 and 1990, which probably needs a scholarly treatment someday. Doug Beardsley had a great chapter in Country On Ice about attending a Canucks game in the mid-eighties that explores the vague apathy and irresolution that characterized the team for a very long time probably until the early 1990s. But I digress.

 

[Canucker]

And the whole team in general between about 1975 and 1990, which probably needs a scholarly treatment someday. Doug Beardsley had a great chapter in Country On Ice about attending a Canucks game in the mid-eighties that explores the vague apathy and irresolution that characterized the team for a very long time probably until the early 1990s. But I digress.

If only Wetcoaster were still around to offer a lengthy dissertation on the subject.

 

[MS]

And the whole team in general between about 1975 and 1990, which probably needs a scholarly treatment someday. Doug Beardsley had a great chapter in Country On Ice about attending a Canucks game in the mid-eighties that explores the vague apathy and irresolution that characterized the team for a very long time probably until the early 1990s. But I digress.

There's a difference between just being a 'bad team' and being ashamed to be a fan.

I've also said before that it's not as simple as '1976-1991 were horrible'. The period from 78-83 they were a fun lunchbucket team that were usually *just* below .500 and would be over .500 by today's standards, and like half that team are still cult heroes in Vancouver. And then from Quinn/Linden arriving there was a steady upward from 1988 or so onward.

It's the period from about 1984-88 that is just extremely dark.

 

[Hit the post]

i

There's a difference between just being a 'bad team' and being ashamed to be a fan.

I've also said before that it's not as simple as '1976-1991 were horrible'. The period from 78-83 they were a fun lunchbucket team that were usually *just* below .500 and would be over .500 by today's standards, and like half that team are still cult heroes in Vancouver. And then from Quinn/Linden arriving there was a steady upward from 1988 or so onward.

It's the period from about 1984-88 that is just extremely dark.

No cap back then & the Canucks ownership weren't exactly spending money like the 'rich teams'. Doesn't mean a strong management team couldn't work to overcome that but it does mean the margin of error is extremely slim. Throw in the WHA (which I *think* hurt weaker teams like the Canucks who looked to actually be turning the corner under Phil Mahoney) raiding players from the league.

Quinn had to work with this type of environment (probably the reason why he had tried the 'contract switcheroo' on Bure [eg., currency paid on contract]).

 

[Reverend Mayhem]

And then Quinn was asleep at the wheel. He was pissed at the new ownership after he had hired his buddy Rick Ley to coach the team and then he had to fire him. Then they hire the idiot Tom Renney, he hung onto guys like Babych, Murzyn, McLean and several others until they had no value.

I'm a Quinn guy from 87-95. But he deserved the boot in 97. Sure they had Almo, but Bure wanted out long before Keenan got here. Linden's play was cratering. They let Diduck walk, Ronning too.

Quinn built it, then he let it rot.

None of that I disagree with - but he still built it from the ground up.

 

[MS]

Quinn had two problems post-1994, one that he could control and one that he couldn't :

1) After being one of the bigger, meaner teams in the NHL from 1991-94, Quinn zigged while the rest of the league zagged and the sport headed into the Dead Puck Era. While everyone else was copying NJ, we traded for Mogilny but also a bunch of other soft skill players - Beranek, Oksiuta, Sillinger, etc. - and it left us out-of-sync with the direction the league was going.

2) The Griffiths were just too small-time as owners post 1994 lockout and the rising salaries basically priced them out of the league. Geoff Courtnall, as an example, the team was forced to try nickel-and-diming him down to $600k vs. the $700k he wanted and he hit free agency and was in disbelief when St. Louis offered him $2 million. We lost most of the guts of the 1994 team because we couldn't afford to pay them in the new financial landscape of the league.

 

[Hit the post]

Quinn had two problems post-1994, one that he could control and one that he couldn't :

1) After being one of the bigger, meaner teams in the NHL from 1991-94, Quinn zigged while the rest of the league zagged and the sport headed into the Dead Puck Era. While everyone else was copying NJ, we traded for Mogilny but also a bunch of other soft skill players - Beranek, Oksiuta, Sillinger, etc. - and it left us out-of-sync with the direction the league was going.

2) The Griffiths were just too small-time as owners post 1994 lockout and the rising salaries basically priced them out of the league. Geoff Courtnall, as an example, the team was forced to try nickel-and-diming him down to $600k vs. the $700k he wanted and he hit free agency and was in disbelief when St. Louis offered him $2 million. We lost most of the guts of the 1994 team because we couldn't afford to pay them in the new financial landscape of the league.

Don't think the 'money pit' (in terms of losses & I'm not just referring to the standings...) known as the Grizzlies didn't help the Griffiths. Have to wonder how much available working capital left after funding the arena themselves without taxpayer corporate welfare.

 

[LuckyDay]

Loyalty was Quinn's greatest "fault". It's why many of his players would do anything for him.

It was his blessing and his curse. As a coach this worked like gangbusters with players willing to do anything for him. Even as a manager it helped him fleece guys like "Professor" Ron Caron but it worked both ways in that he held on to some players when he shouldn't have. Caron's trade fell on his lap, but as manager he made some questionable decisions sometimes.

There's a difference between just being a 'bad team' and being ashamed to be a fan.

I've also said before that it's not as simple as '1976-1991 were horrible'. The period from 78-83 they were a fun lunchbucket team that were usually *just* below .500 and would be over .500 by today's standards, and like half that team are still cult heroes in Vancouver. And then from Quinn/Linden arriving there was a steady upward from 1988 or so onward.

It's the period from about 1984-88 that is just extremely dark.

A connection between Bill Laforge and Mike Keenan?

Other times to be ashamed to be a fan was Griffiths trading away Gary Smith and firing Roger Neilsen then not paying him. I also cried when Glen Hanlon was traded.

 

[LuckyDay]

Don't think the 'money pit' (in terms of losses & I'm not just referring to the standings...) known as the Grizzlies didn't help the Griffiths. Have to wonder how much available working capital left after funding the arena themselves without taxpayer corporate welfare.

Jr did bring in the investors to the team to fund his wild ventures. But they also thought they would be tough negotiators with contractors and pull fast ones like paying Pavel C$7m instead of US$7m like AlMo got. They didn't recognize that since Lemieux, the NHL had joined the new era of sports egos where you had to pamper your stars or you could get fired instead of them.

 

[Hit the post]

Caron's trade fell on his lap, but as manager he made some questionable decisions sometimes

No argument there but even the league's best GMs can make the odd bad trade. You take risks when you feel it's right & trust your judgement (which of course isn't always going to be right or in the case of DimJim...):

 

[Vector]

 

[Bubbles]

Read the Canucks section and the Russia part at Chapters. Nothing I didn't really know beforehand. I was waiting for more interesting anecdotes about Russia but there wasn't too many.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

Read the Canucks section and the Russia part at Chapters. Nothing I didn't really know beforehand. I was waiting for more interesting anecdotes about Russia but there wasn't too many.

there are still chapterses?

 

[Bubbles]

there are still chapterses?

Is it Indigo now?

 

[F A N]

Keenan trading Linden is one of the best trades in team history. Full credit to him for developing Bertuzzi as well. There is a method to his madness he’s just too mad.

His time here was chaotic but it’s not entirely his fault. He would be like Boudreau if Boudreau was Babcock and given GM duties.

 

[Mr. Canucklehead]

Killed some time in Indigo Books today reading his chapter on Vancouver. He doesn’t come across any more likeable, sympathetic or reasonable in his book. Confirms Messier was calling all the shots, his agenda to pretty much immediately dispose of Linden, and his antics to publicly taunt Burke about the roster.

He did confirm one hilarious conversation that took place upon Burke’s arrival. And that was Keenan saying “have you read my contract? It says I get input on all personnel decisions”. And Burke replied “have you read my contract? It says I hire and fire the coach”.

 

[Ernie]

I'm glad you guys are reading it for free instead of paying for it.

 

[Mr. Canucklehead]

I'm glad you guys are reading it for free instead of paying for it.

I wouldn’t give that asshole any of my money.

 

[Grifter3511]

And then Quinn was asleep at the wheel. He was pissed at the new ownership after he had hired his buddy Rick Ley to coach the team and then he had to fire him. Then they hire the idiot Tom Renney, he hung onto guys like Babych, Murzyn, McLean and several others until they had no value.

I'm a Quinn guy from 87-95. But he deserved the boot in 97. Sure they had Almo, but Bure wanted out long before Keenan got here. Linden's play was cratering. They let Diduck walk, Ronning too.

Quinn built it, then he let it rot.

Yep,

No Keenan/Messier no West Coast Express and 'possibly' no Sedins. Keenan/Messier paved the way for the brighest era(s) in Canucks history.

A perfect example of 'it's always darkest before the dawn.'

 

[Jyrki21]

So two things worth mentioning in this thread, with Keenan doing the book circuit -- and ironically both come out of other recent Canuck-focused books.

Keenan trading Linden is one of the best trades in team history. Full credit to him for developing Bertuzzi as well. There is a method to his madness he’s just too mad.

If you read Daniel Wagner's book, he actually reveals that the return on the Linden trade wasn't Keenan's doing at all. Keenan just wanted to get rid of Linden, and he left it in Steve Tambellini's hands how to go about it. It was Tambo who brought us Bertuzzi and McCabe.

I am also reading Ed Willes' book right now, and he explains a detail that always bothered me about the Canucks' history -- that they left promising, scrappy winger Scott Walker unprotected for Nashville to take in the 1998 expansion draft, protecting some lower-value veterans ahead of him. (It was always Jamie Huscroft who bothered me, but there were different numbers of protectable forwards and D-men so maybe that's a red herring). In the Canucks' case, instead of 25-year old Walker they protected 33-year old Peter Zezel (who Brian Burke would later try to trade and lead to a minor scandal because of his personal circumstances). Why? Because Keenan liked him from his Philadelphia days. Burke wanted to protect Walker, but was cajoled by Canucks ownership into letting Keenan "win a round", knowing they were going to butt heads over everything. Walker went on to become one of the early Predators' best players. Zezel only played 41 more games in the NHL.

 

[F A N]

So two things worth mentioning in this thread, with Keenan doing the book circuit -- and ironically both come out of other recent Canuck-focused books.



If you read Daniel Wagner's book, he actually reveals that the return on the Linden trade wasn't Keenan's doing at all. Keenan just wanted to get rid of Linden, and he left it in Steve Tambellini's hands how to go about it. It was Tambo who brought us Bertuzzi and McCabe.

I am also reading Ed Willes' book right now, and he explains a detail that always bothered me about the Canucks' history -- that they left promising, scrappy winger Scott Walker unprotected for Nashville to take in the 1998 expansion draft, protecting some lower-value veterans ahead of him. (It was always Jamie Huscroft who bothered me, but there were different numbers of protectable forwards and D-men so maybe that's a red herring). In the Canucks' case, instead of 25-year old Walker they protected 33-year old Peter Zezel (who Brian Burke would later try to trade and lead to a minor scandal because of his personal circumstances). Why? Because Keenan liked him from his Philadelphia days. Burke wanted to protect Walker, but was cajoled by Canucks ownership into letting Keenan "win a round", knowing they were going to butt heads over everything. Walker went on to become one of the early Predators' best players. Zezel only played 41 more games in the NHL.

I think it was Tambellini and Penny together? Regardless, if it wasn't for Keenan, Linden would likely never have been traded (Burke said he wouldn't have) and I give Keenan credit for Bertuzzi's development.