Top 40 Canucks of All-Time Preliminary Discussion Thread - Lists Now Being Accepted

I have my top... 5 figured out lol.

I'm having a hard time sorting out Gradin-Smyl-Tanti. What order should they be in? How much bump does Smyl get for being the captain and fan favorite?

I went Smyl-Gradin-Tanti. They're almost right in a row too. Pesky Ohlund, always getting in the way.

Smyl gets a bump because he was an extremely effective player, and he was around for longer than Gradin and Tanti, and held most of the scoring records at the time he retired. He might not have had the raw offensive skill of the other two, but he had a greater overall impact.
 
I know what you mean. I hated Matt Cooke even when he was a Canuck. But trying to look at his time here objectively, surprised he played 566 games here, which is 18th all-time.

I hated Cooke here, and elsewhere just a cheap player.

that being said 566 games of 3rd line play still isn't good enough for my top 60, he will be sliding out for sure.
 
No question.

I've got my top 19 figured out. My top five defensemen in order are Ohlund-Snepsts-Hamhuis-Lumme-Salo. I won't slot them in yet but the next three are going to be Bieksa-Edler-Jovanovski in order.

Doug Lidster not top 8 defenceman for you?

Joe Pelletier has a good bio on him here: http://canuckslegends.blogspot.ca/2007/06/doug-lidster.html

Defenceman Doug Lidster retired in the summer of 1998 to join the Canadian national hockey team as a playing coach.

"Its a great way to give back to the program that gave so much to me," said Lidster.

However his NHL retirement was short lived as it turned out. Once the national team's season was over, Doug signed with the Dallas Stars to finish the 1998-99 season with them. Doug played in 17 regular season games and was part of the Stars Stanley Cup championship!

Lidster was a member of the 1983-84 Canadian National team that finished 4th in the Sarajevo Olympics. For Lidster, a standout the 4 previous years with Colorado College of the WCHA, it was a dream come true to play in the Olympic games.

Following the Olympics, Lidster joined the Vancouver Canucks who made him their 133rd overall pick in the 1980 Entry Draft. The Kamloops British Columbia native went on to become arguably the best blue liner in Canuck history to that point.

An exceptional skater and good puck handler, Lidster lacked a good point shot to establish himself as a top NHL defenseman. A hard worker, he relied more on his finesse and skating game than his non-existent physical game, despite his good size (6'1" 200lbs")

Lidster played 9 strong seasons with the Canucks, setting team records with 63 points by a defenseman in 1986-87. Lidster, who would have been a perfect #2 or #3 defenseman on almost any other club at the time, was the Canucks #1 man. He did an outstanding job but got little recognition from the NHL media as his team was so bad.

The NHL community always was impressed by Lidster's play. Twice he was asked to represent Canada at the World Championships, both times winning silver medals. He was also invited to but eventually cut from the 1991 Canada Cup squad.

The summer of 1993 saw Lidster move to New York in a bizarre move that saw the Canucks acquire John Vanbiesbrouck, who was then in turn left exposed in the expansion draft to protect goalies Kirk McLean and Kay Whitmore. Oddly enough, Lidster, who for so many years fought so many battles for the Canucks, found himself fighting his biggest hockey battle against the Canucks in the spring of 1994. In a classic 7 game showdown, Lidster's Rangers narrowly edged out Lidster's former teammates.

Lidster, who became a Mike Keenan favorite while in New York, was traded to St. Louis in the summer of 1994 along with Esa Tikkanen in exchange for Petr Nedved. The deal was used to compensate the Rangers who suspiciously lost coach Keenan to the Blues just days after winning the Cup. The Rangers cried fowl and the league ordered the Blues to compensate the Rangers.

Lidster played only 37 games with St. Louis that season, and the following summer was back on his way to New York where he rounded out his NHL career with three more seasons on the Rangers blue line. "Liddy" then jumped to the national team program before joining the Dallas Stars.

He would retire at the end of the 1998-99 season, and turned to coaching in the junior leagues.
 
I know what you mean. I hated Matt Cooke even when he was a Canuck. But trying to look at his time here objectively, surprised he played 566 games here, which is 18th all-time.

I like Ruttu but he is 67th in games played, did he do enough besides scoring to make a top 60 list, that I'm not sure of.

I hated Cooke here, and elsewhere just a cheap player.

that being said 566 games of 3rd line play still isn't good enough for my top 60, he will be sliding out for sure.

i just sat down to actually see what a top 60 would look like. obviously my list will change, but i think i have most of the names down. i have 57 guys i feel belong in a top 60, and then 8 more names of guys below #57 that probably are all in a dogfight for #s 52-60.

of interest:

most games played to not make the list: murzyn (452 games, 28th all-time)

most points to not make the list: sandlak (221 points, 34th all-time)

most points in a single season not to make the list: pederson (76 points, 37th all-time, only 16 guys have had higher scoring seasons not counting doubles, and pederson made my dog fight/run-off list)

#44: odjick

#55: cooke

not on list: cloutier (but he's also on the dog fight/run-off list)


but i have lots of learning about pre-courtnall/ronning trade guys to do before any of this is more than a vague guess.
 
i just sat down to actually see what a top 60 would look like. obviously my list will change, but i think i have most of the names down. i have 57 guys i feel belong in a top 60, and then 8 more names of guys below #57 that probably are all in a dogfight for #s 52-60.

of interest:

most games played to not make the list: murzyn (452 games, 28th all-time)

most points to not make the list: sandlak (221 points, 34th all-time)

most points in a single season not to make the list: pederson (76 points, 37th all-time, only 16 guys have had higher scoring seasons not counting doubles, and pederson made my dog fight/run-off list)

#44: odjick

#55: cooke

not on list: cloutier (but he's also on the dog fight/run-off list)


but i have lots of learning about pre-courtnall/ronning trade guys to do before any of this is more than a vague guess.

Odjick. What am I gonna do with him? I really don't know. Hard to quantify his on-ice contributions.
 
also, it just hit me that tanev maybe at least deserves a second thought for #s 55-60. man, after #52 my list is a real crap show of also rans and guys who were here for less than three seasons.
 
I have my top... 5 figured out lol.

I'm having a hard time sorting out Gradin-Smyl-Tanti. What order should they be in? How much bump does Smyl get for being the captain and fan favorite?

Smyl is a guy who gets a bump fro being the heart and soul of the Canucks much like Linden and to a lesser extent Bieksa.

Man do we ever need a guy like Smyl/Linden right now on our team or what?

Skill wise Smyl wasn't very good but his heart and leadership were elite, some nights that Smyl/Gradin/Fraser line wouldn't beat the other teams top line in stats but I can't remember them getting out played or out tried very often at all.
 
also, it just hit me that tanev maybe at least deserves a second thought for #s 55-60. man, after #52 my list is a real crap show of also rans and guys who were here for less than three seasons.

I don't see Tanev being a factor. Remember we are only taking into account what they've done up to today. No future assumptions.

Just haven't done enough yet to overcome guys like Aucoin, Ehrhoff, McCarthy, Lanz, Halward, ect. who are in the 15-20 range for defencemen. He's really only been a legit top 4 dman for what, 2 seasons?
 
That was 100% an oversight, and partly why I started tossing my list out here, to make sure I didn't forget anyone.

I'd have to put him ahead of Edler and Jovanovski at least.

Glad I could help. :)

He'll be #4/5/6 for defencemen for me. Ohlund/Snepsts/Lumme top 3 for sure. Then Lidster/Salo/Jovo. Then Edler/Bieksa.
 
i just sat down to actually see what a top 60 would look like. obviously my list will change, but i think i have most of the names down. i have 57 guys i feel belong in a top 60, and then 8 more names of guys below #57 that probably are all in a dogfight for #s 52-60.

of interest:

most games played to not make the list: murzyn (452 games, 28th all-time)

most points to not make the list: sandlak (221 points, 34th all-time)

most points in a single season not to make the list: pederson (76 points, 37th all-time, only 16 guys have had higher scoring seasons not counting doubles, and pederson made my dog fight/run-off list)

#44: odjick

#55: cooke

not on list: cloutier (but he's also on the dog fight/run-off list)


but i have lots of learning about pre-courtnall/ronning trade guys to do before any of this is more than a vague guess.

Re look at Pederson and forget who he was traded for, he played with lousy line mates and had a decent run and then injuries.

I remember how they tried to force Sandlak into becoming a better player with Pederson and it was like watching a junior player try to keep up to Wayne Gretzky it was that bad.

Sandlak had no hockey sense (or poor refelxes) and would be eaten alive with less time and space, not that he was very good to begin with.

No way guys like cookie or Sedlbuauer are making it in over him IMO.
 
I would find it pretty difficult to put Edler or Jovanovski ahead of Hamhuis.

Jovo for sure. You could say they had the same impact, but Jovo did it for almost twice as long. He was the emotional leader on the team too, kinda like Bieksa has been over the last chunk of years.

Hamhuis/Edler/Bieksa will be close actually. Could go either way. Hamhuis is the best D of the group, but hasn't been here for near as long. I probably lean towards longevity for this project than most though.

In 3 or 4 years, Hamhuis could be a top 5 D for the Canucks easily, providing he doesn't fall off a cliff. He'd be right up there with Salo and Lidster.
 
Jovo for sure. You could say they had the same impact, but Jovo did it for almost twice as long. He was the emotional leader on the team too, kinda like Bieksa has been over the last chunk of years.

Jovo was a great offensive player, but I watched the entire WCE era and for every great offensive play he made, there were an equal number of bad reads that led to 2 on 1 scoring chances for the other team. He and Cloutier were the main catalysts for the 2003 meltdown to Minnesota.

Conversely, Hamhuis was our team's best defenseman at the team's best time, and he was one of the major reasons the team was elite. His prime, from 2010 to 2012, is the highest prime any Canucks defenseman has ever had.

I think we're past the era of rewarding players for being flashy and accumulating points. We're seeing the true value of tactically superior players who don't always have the raw numbers, like Hamhuis and Tanev (and Harold Snepsts).

Hamhuis was and still is a far more effective player than Jovanovski was. And I think the only thing keeping him behind Ohlund on this list is his lack of longevity, to this point.
 
Jovo was a great offensive player, but I watched the entire WCE era and for every great offensive play he made, there were an equal number of bad reads that led to 2 on 1 scoring chances for the other team. He and Cloutier were the main catalysts for the 2003 meltdown to Minnesota.

Conversely, Hamhuis was our team's best defenseman at the team's best time, and he was one of the major reasons the team was elite. His prime, from 2010 to 2012, is the highest prime any Canucks defenseman has ever had.

I think we're past the era of rewarding players for being flashy and accumulating points. We're seeing the true value of tactically superior players who don't always have the raw numbers, like Hamhuis and Tanev (and Harold Snepsts).

Hamhuis was and still is a far more effective player than Jovanovski was. And I think the only thing keeping him behind Ohlund on this list is his lack of longevity, to this point.

Fair enough. Agree to disagree.
 
/\ lol.

So I just finished my first draft of my top 60. Looks like I was able to sneak in Gino and Tiger in the last 20 spots. Also got in Ehrhoff, Brown and Reinhart at the end of the list too. Man, we haven't had much success with defencemen have we?
 
bubla has a larger resume but was a bit of a black hole defensively and a bit like the Czech older version of Jovo a guy who played a rough game abut that disguised his defensive shortcomings a bit.
Have to remember that Bubla came over at the end of his career (when he was well past his prime). Taking that into context, I thought he was still fairly effective.

Man, we haven't had much success with defencemen have we?
Went downhill after we drafted Dale Tallon.:sarcasm:

(seriously though, we probably screwed up his development by shifting him from defense to forward, and back again)
 
I don't see Tanev being a factor. Remember we are only taking into account what they've done up to today. No future assumptions.

Just haven't done enough yet to overcome guys like Aucoin, Ehrhoff, McCarthy, Lanz, Halward, ect. who are in the 15-20 range for defencemen. He's really only been a legit top 4 dman for what, 2 seasons?

i did not even consider him. totally forgot he had that one crazy year on the PP.

looking at his hockey-ref page, he played here a lot longer (and with bigger minutes) than i remember. in my mind, he was somewhere between peca and mccabe in terms of impact as a canuck. this project is going to be really hard on me as i try to un-unremember the messier years.

do i need to think about steve staios too?

EDIT: no, no i don't.

SECOND EDIT: but still, tanev > aucoin easily, even with those 18 PP goals.
 
Re look at Pederson and forget who he was traded for, he played with lousy line mates and had a decent run and then injuries.

I remember how they tried to force Sandlak into becoming a better player with Pederson and it was like watching a junior player try to keep up to Wayne Gretzky it was that bad.

Sandlak had no hockey sense (or poor refelxes) and would be eaten alive with less time and space, not that he was very good to begin with.

No way guys like cookie or Sedlbuauer are making it in over him IMO.

if you adjust his stats for era, pederson's three seasons here look almost identical (slightly worse, actually) to andrew cassels' three seasons here. obviously pederson didn't have a markus naslund to pass to, but pederson was also getting outscored by tanti and a young gus adams.

you suggested upthread that he was one of the best canucks we'd ever seen up to that point. what am i missing that would square that?
 
if you adjust his stats for era, pederson's three seasons here look almost identical (slightly worse, actually) to andrew cassels' three seasons here. obviously pederson didn't have a markus naslund to pass to, but pederson was also getting outscored by tanti and a young gus adams.

you suggested upthread that he was one of the best canucks we'd ever seen up to that point. what am i missing that would square that?

Yea, solid numbers but nothing really special. Though Cassels gets a bit forgotten about as well. I had both on a giant list of players to consider but I didn't give either too much thought on my initial top 60.

I'm not sure how others are doing it, but for this project I've been putting decent emphasis on how much a player's Canuck tenure stood out in their career. The guys who are known as Canucks are going to get bonus points. I don't think it's as influential in the top 30 or so, but when you start getting into guys with only a couple years toward the back of the list, I think it matters more. Pederson's time with the Canucks is undervalued because of who he was traded for, but when people think of him, it's basically just his time with Boston, and the trade. I think that pushes him down further for me.
 
Well the points standings then, that is a ranking in-itself. I assume that everyone have their top 10 fairly well motivated. But after that the ranking might be a bit more tentative. I mentioned before that defensive D-men should be pushed a bit more in the discussion as they don't get enough credit in the stats. But what about the forwards outside of top 10? Is it anyone who are misplaced in an overall Canucks ranking if you only look at their point production?


I throw this out as I think this bucket should be kicked a bit more.
 
if you adjust his stats for era, pederson's three seasons here look almost identical (slightly worse, actually) to andrew cassels' three seasons here. obviously pederson didn't have a markus naslund to pass to, but pederson was also getting outscored by tanti and a young gus adams.

you suggested upthread that he was one of the best canucks we'd ever seen up to that point. what am i missing that would square that?

I think Pederson did enough here to make the top 60 list, after that it depends on how much longevity over rides peak.

He is 76th in GP and 36th in points and played a good 2 way game
 
okay i now have added pederson to a big list of guys who were here for 4 or less years. will sort them out later, when i have the time to research them.

off the top of my head, and without going to h-r to look up how long they were actually here, some of those names include schmautz, rota, walton, blight, gould, boldirev, hlinka, as well as more recent guys like mitchell, ehrhoff, and brown. i guess i should add andrew cassels too, though having watched him my gut says his tenure can't possibly be one of the 60 best.
 
okay i now have added pederson to a big list of guys who were here for 4 or less years. will sort them out later, when i have the time to research them.

off the top of my head, and without going to h-r to look up how long they were actually here, some of those names include schmautz, rota, walton, blight, gould, boldirev, hlinka, as well as more recent guys like mitchell, ehrhoff, and brown. i guess i should add andrew cassels too, though having watched him my gut says his tenure can't possibly be one of the 60 best.

Yet Cassels is 47th in points despite his short time here that has to put him in the mix for around 60th right?

Or does a guy like a Gino/Cooke type of player get the nod by playing more games as role players?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Ad

Ad