Why Mark Messier is Often Regarded the Worst/Most Hated Vancouver Canuck of All Time.

[JA]

As a reminder, the Canucks had that record because they went through a stretch where they won just 3 times in 16 games without Mark Messier - and in those final 30 games with Messier, they won 15 games and collected 37 points, missing the playoffs by just 4 points. In that 30 game playoff push, Messier had 26 points.

In those same 30 games, though, Messier was a -10. He was a -15 that whole year, which was the worst on the team, and by far the worst of any forward. The second-worst +/- that season was held by Jason Strudwick, with a +/- of -13. Donald Brashear was third-worst at -9.

Markus Naslund, who also had 26 points in the last 30 games, had a +/- of 0 in those 30 games.

Todd Bertuzzi, who had 25 points in the last 29 games, was a +6 in that span.

Andrew Cassels, who had 33 points in the last 30 games, was a +9 in those 30 games.

Mattias Ohlund was a +10 in the last 28 games.

Harold Druken had 13 points in the last 30 games and was a +10.

Brendan Morrison had 9 points in 12 games upon arrival, and was a +4.

Messier's -10 in the last 30 games really sticks out relative to the rest of the team. In fact, in the last 30 games his +/- was twice as bad as it was in the first half of the season (-5 in the first 36 games). Andrew Cassels, in the 29 wins he participated in that year, was a +25. Mark Messier, in 27 wins, was a +4 in their wins. Todd Bertuzzi was a +19 in 30 wins.

Canucks inch closer to a shot at the playoffs: [Final Edition]
MacIntyre, Iain. The Vancouver Sun [Vancouver, B.C] 06 Mar 2000: C1 / FRONT.

...

The steps the Canucks have taken the last four weeks normally are possible only in zero gravity. They can take another moonwalk tonight when they play at home against the Toronto Maple Leafs.

Already, the Canucks have narrowed by eight points the gulf between themselves and the playoffs. Their 8-3-2 march out of the all-star break is their best 13-game stint since November, 1996.

They are getting scoring everywhere - third-liner May scored twice Saturday and other goals came from second-liners Mogilny and Cassels - the defence has greatly reduced its mistakes, and the goaltending is superb.

Penalty-killers have allowed one goal in the last 21 disadvantages, and the power play is 20-for-89 the last six weeks.

"Before the all-star break, we were losing a ton of one-goal games and two-goal games," grinder Matt Cooke said. "Now, after the all-star break, we're finding ways to win these games. It gave us confidence."

...

Works Cited

MacIntyre, Iain. "Canucks Inch Closer to a Shot at the Playoffs." The Vancouver Sun: C1 / FRONT. Mar 06 2000. ProQuest. Web. 8 July 2015 .

 

[MS]

As usual, fans from New York who probably didn't watch more than 1 or 2 Canuck games with Messier on the team and know absolutely nothing about what happened come it to weigh their opinions.

The guy was a lazy, embarrassing joke from start to finish as a Canuck. Period.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Not exactly, TDMM.

His departure from Vancouver had very little to do with the fans' feelings about him or recollection of him. The hate towards him was expressed throughout his tenure in Vancouver; I think the only people who liked him were Brian Burke, Marc Crawford and the young players; from what I've read, Crawford was a yes-man to Messier, allowing him to say or do as he pleased. They seemed to value his leadership in the dressing room, but as a player he brought nothing and if not for his reputation across the rest of the hockey world, I don't think he would have been as accepted. If any other player had done what he did, I don't think he would have been there for long.

Fans booed right from the start. Eventually fans just stopped showing up, and those who continued to go to games still booed. Some fans gave up their season tickets. When The Province asked fans what the team should do with Messier, many stated that he should either retire or the team should trade him. Fans wanted him gone. There was never any desire from anyone outside of management and his teammates to have him remain a Canuck. The sooner he was gone, the better.







When Messier left Vancouver, fans reflected on his time with the team but opinions had not changed. Overall, his time in Vancouver was viewed as a catastrophic failure.



Andrew Castell, a hockey historian, memorabilia collector and Canucks "superfan" who went to over 1,300 Canucks games in the team's first 2.9 decades of existence, declared himself after the 1998-99 season to be no longer a fan of the team and that he would never watch another Canucks game.

Here's an article from 2011, during the 2011 Stanley Cup Finals that, of course, featured Vancouver:

Above, in one of the other articles, is a quotation from Castell. I'll re-post it below:

So management, coaches, and the younger players (the future) were all on Messier's side, and the old guard (who were being pushed aside) and the fans were against him?

It's just... a bizarre dynamic.

 

[Rebuilt]

I guess we will never know if Messier was brought into Vancouver to sell tickets while they rebuilt.

Lets face it, the dynamic duo of Messier/Keenan managed to screw up the team so badly we got Bertuzzi, Mc Cabe and Chuberov for Linden, Jovanoski for Bure , and draft Daniel Sedin.

Burkie pulled off his magic to twist McCabe and other picks into Henrik Sedin. The rest they say, is history.

 

[tdfxman]

I read the first page of this thread and the last, so my apologies.

But I CAN NOT EVER SEE TOEWS doing this.

I mean I never knew any of this with Messier being a tool. I mean how can he have an NHL AWARD named after him? wow

 

[quoipourquoi]

I read the first page of this thread and the last, so my apologies.

But I CAN NOT EVER SEE TOEWS doing this.

I mean I never knew any of this with Messier being a tool. I mean how can he have an NHL AWARD named after him? wow

Read the other pages of the thread.

 

[JA]

I guess we will never know if Messier was brought into Vancouver to sell tickets while they rebuilt.

Lets face it, the dynamic duo of Messier/Keenan managed to screw up the team so badly we got Bertuzzi, Mc Cabe and Chuberov for Linden, Jovanoski for Bure , and draft Daniel Sedin.

Burkie pulled off his magic to twist McCabe and other picks into Henrik Sedin. The rest they say, is history.

If one has to be given credit for the rebuild, it's Brian Burke. Keenan's objective, when he joined the Canucks, was to win right away. He became frustrated after a month and made trades that, for the most part, were not at all about the future but instead about the present. He replaced the team for one that was arguably worse. Messier, of course, played a role too as has been documented.

Again, these are the trades that were made while Keenan was responsible for transactions:

http://www.nucksmisconduct.com/2011/7/11/2269136/history-of-canucks-trades-and-signings-1970-present

January 1998: To Vancouver: Sean Burke, Geoff Sanderson and Enrico Ciccone
To Carolina: Martin Gelinas and Kirk McLean.

February 1998: To Buffalo: Geoff Sanderson
To Vancouver: Brad May and a 3rd round pick in 1999 (Rene Vydareny).

To Philadelphia: Mike Sillinger
To Vancouver: 5th round pick in 1998 Draft (Garrett Prosofsky)

To Vancouver: Peter Zezel
To New Jersey: 5th round pick in 1998 (Anton But)

To Islanders: Trevor Linden
To Vancouver: Todd Bertuzzi, Bryan McCabe, and a 3rd round pick in 1998 (Jarkko Ruutu)

March 1998: To Boston: Grant Ledyard
To Vancouver: 8th round pick in 1998 (Curtis Valentine)

To Philadelphia: Sean Burke
To Vancouver: Garth Snow

To Toronto: Lonny Bohonos
To Vancouver: Brandon Convery

To Islanders: Gino Odjick
To Canucks: Jason Strudwick

To Philly: Dave Babych
To Vancouver: 5th round pick in 1998 (Justin Morrison)

The team didn't exactly get younger; most of the previous core was simply swapped out for a more questionable group of players, with the exception being the Linden trade. Other players could have been traded at the deadline such as Jyrki Lumme, but Keenan elected to keep them until they became UFAs. Lumme probably had more value because he wasn't too far removed from his last 50-point season and ended up with 30 points in 74 games in 1997-98. Keenan kept him because he wanted to push for the playoffs, but the whole campaign was a colossal disaster. General managers don't get credit for doing what he did; usually they get fired.

Role players new target for Keenan: [Final Edition]
Jamieson, Jim. The Province [Vancouver, B.C] 22 Dec 1997: A60.

Like a meticulous mechanic who's inherited a neglected car, Mike Keenan continues to tighten the nuts and screws on the Vancouver Canucks. The latest focus for the head coach's ratchet is the role players, whom the Canucks coach criticized after Saturday's 5-0 loss to the Chicago Blackhawks at GM Place. Following the game Keenan called a team meeting that lasted 25 minutes. At practice on Sunday he finished with 15 minutes of skating drills that even had thoroughbred Pavel Bure on all fours.

In typical Keenan fashion, the pressure and the stakes are raised as he insinuates his own standards on individual performance. First he challenged Trevor Linden, then Martin Gelinas and now the role players.

"We needed a training session and we would have skated regardless of the outcome of the game," said Keenan of the gruelling drill. "I met with them after (the Chicago loss) because I thought it was a teachable moment, a time to concentrate on some of the things we wanted to develop in this program and to explain it. I came in here and the club was at about .250 (win percentage). Now we're a .500 club but we want to be at .600. They've made great strides in 30 days, the next plateau will be that much harder."

That will involve the role players -- the third and fourth line guys who are expected to make an impact with physical play -- performing closer to Keenan's expectations. It wasn't difficult to ascertain who was being fingered on Saturday. Scott Walker got just 1:27 playing time and didn't play after the first period; Gino Odjick got 7:11 and Donald Brashear had just 3:11.

Keenan's novel approach was to play defencemen Jyrki Lumme, Dana Murzyn and Grant Ledyard on the wing. Walker agrees it adds pressure to an already tough job... Brashear says the degree of belligerence Keenan is asking for demands a fine line between helping the team and hurting it.

"We know what he wants, but he changes his mind sometimes," said Brashear. "He wants us to get out there and be physical and run around to get a check, but sometimes when you do that you make a mistake and he doesn't play you anymore. So then you think about it and you stop running around and you try not to make a mistake, but then you get to sit on the bench anyway." Keenan says he didn't like what he saw from the role players off the get-go Saturday.

"If you're a role player and the first shift you go out and pass up a chance at a hit when it's there that means you're not mentally prepared," said Keenan. "Three of our guys took a pass on hits right away. The first thing you look for is for them to make an impact as a checking or grinding presence. We have the other elements, but we need this to become a more complete team. The exciting thing for them that they haven't realized yet is they'd play a lot more if they'd get out there and get their job done. We don't want to have to play the skill players that much.

"They're looking for excuses. They're sitting on the fence and they're not sure whether they're in or out."

`Softer' Keenan still mostly iron:: [Final Edition]
Mason, Gary. The Vancouver Sun [Vancouver, B.C] 22 Nov 1997: C1 FRONT.

...

Fear can be a great motivator. And Keenan has used it wisely. It has been one of the greatest weapons in his coaching arsenal. One he still carries with him.

"I don't think that personality trait or coaching ingredient will diminish," Keenan told me.

You're allowed a sigh of relief now.

"Sometimes it's described as fear other times it's described as respect. It's like the teacher you had in elementary school or high school. You perceived that teacher as the most difficult to deal with but later in life you realize that's the individual you had the highest degree of respect for."

Brett Hull just can't see that right now.

...

Time isn't on Canucks' side: Keenan's crew likely needs 19 wins in 25 games: [Final Edition]
Bell, Terry. The Province [Vancouver, B.C] 23 Feb 1998: A35.

And so all the offseason spending and the early season optimism has been reduced to this.

With just 25 games remaining on their 1997-98 schedule, the Vancouver Canucks will attempt to somehow limp, scratch and crawl from 13th place to eighth in the less-than-scintillating Western Conference.

If they manage to do it, Disney should have the cameras rolling so they can make the movie. They can call it The Incredible Journey II. It's a tough, near impossible distance to travel.

Assuming that the Canucks will need just 78 points to reach the playoffs, the now 16-33-8 team must manufacture 38 points from its remaining 25 games.

...

The first six games -- against Anaheim, at Calgary, against Ottawa, at Los Angeles, against Calgary and against Tampa Bay -- are all winnable. In fact, the team can ill afford to lose even one of them. Keenan, who was finally given freedom to make trades in late January, swung four deals just before the Olympic break and it's unlikely that he's finished.

Keenan shipped Geoff Sanderson to Buffalo for Brad May on Feb. 4, then, a day later, sent Mike Sillinger to Philadelphia for a sixth- round (1998) draft pick and obtained Peter Zezel from New Jersey for a fifth-rounder. On Feb. 6, he dealt Trevor Linden to the Islanders for defenceman Bryan McCabe and forward Todd Bertuzzi. The deals left the Canucks bigger, tougher and somewhat younger.

Is Trader Mike finished? Don't count on it. There was even a rumor that Hedican had been traded during the Olympic break but the teams were waiting until the trade embargo was lifted Sunday to announce the deal. Both Keenan and Hedican, who is nursing a lower abdominal strain, denied it, though the former suggested he may not be done dealing.

"We are thin at centre and we have to look at that," says Keenan, who has Mark Messier, Zezel, rookie Dave Scatchard and Scott Walker in the middle now. We'll make deals if they will improve the team."

The first six games may be crucial to Keenan's plans. If the Canucks lose two or three of those games, look for some veterans like defenceman Jyrki Lumme and winger Markus Naslund to be dealt before the March 24 trading deadline. If they get on a roll, Keenan may want to risk keeping them around, even though Lumme becomes an unrestricted free agent this summer.

...

Forward Gino Odjick will almost certainly be dealt to a team that feels it needs to add toughness heading into the stretch run. And defenceman Grant Ledyard has asked for a trade. Still, for the Canucks, it's a matter of winning every night out.

"We left on a good note and we have to carry that over," says captain Mark Messier. "Our goal is to continue where we left off. We're not that far out of it... Now we have to play solid, playoff-type hockey from here on in. There are no points to give away.

"We're not likely to go unbeaten but if we can play playoff-type hockey it'll give us something to focus on."

...

Iron Mike aims for .500: Keenan hasn't improved Canucks since taking over: [Final Edition]
Gilchrist, Kent. The Province [Vancouver, B.C] 23 Mar 1998: A38.

Since they have been realistically out of the playoffs for a good six weeks, it's merciful they are finally close to being mathematically eliminated, too. For the diehards, the net gain from a seven-game .500 2-2-3 road trip was one measly point. As of Sunday, the Edmonton Oilers, owners of the eighth and final playoff spot in the Western Conference, were nine points ahead of the Canucks. They had been 10 ahead on March 9 after a Vancouver home loss to St. Louis Blues and their own road win over Tampa Bay Lightning.

And for those who think the Canucks have improved under the guidance of Iron Mike, he has had the team for 52 games and it is 17- 24-11 with him munching ice cubes behind them on the bench. That's seven games below .500. It was 4-13-2 or nine games below .500 for Tom Renney. True, it is an improvement, but it's so insignificant as to be practically negligible in a picture any bigger than something viewed through a microscope.

It is a much bigger picture that those making decisions at Orca Bay and with the best interests of the fans' future loyalty in mind should be considering. And while a shakeup of the entire hockey organization must finally be an undeniable conclusion, it has to all start at Keenan.

Can they attract a general manager who can control Keenan or who would even want to do the maintenance work that would entail? Or do they just hand over the title of general manager to him, cross their fingers and hope they can sell him to a growing-ever-more-skeptical public?

Keenan has said if he had been here since training camp the Canucks wouldn't be in this predicament. That's easy to say. It would be the same as if Steve Tambellini said they wouldn't be in this predicament if they had kept Sean Burke, Geoff Sanderson and Enrico Ciccone... Wonder how many fans would have traded those two for Brad May, Garth Snow and Jamie Huscroft, which is what Canucks have now, since Keenan assumed the trading responsibilities?

Keenan has also said not being GM didn't matter to him, he hadn't been interested in it in Chicago or Philadelphia or anywhere else. Yeah, right.

...

And he said he had learned from his earlier experiences that you have to handle today's players differently. That he had become more understanding.

Trevor Linden, Grant Ledyard and Ciccone to name three would be glad to know they were dealing with the new, softer Keenan. Ledyard would find that particularly rich. The defenceman found out Keenan told the rest of the Canucks he'd quit when he called back to the dressing room from Dallas to let teammates know his wife's biopsy for breast cancer was benign.

....

Getting candid with Keenan: The day he loses the fire raging within him is the day he'll quit, says Canucks' coach Mike Keenan in defence of his controversial style.: [Final Edition]
The Vancouver Sun [Vancouver, B.C] 10 Oct 1998: C1 / FRONT.

...

So here Keenan sits, defending his coaching style on the one hand, while making another pre-season promise on the other. "One of my downfalls is my impatience and my emotional level and I have to really work at it as a coach," Keenan says. Fat chance. The truth is, Mike Keenan has always viewed his temper as a tool that can make a player better, to make someone look over his shoulder to see where the coach is, to be motivated to play better. Or so the thinking goes. Keenan can do nothing about his temper. It's a byproduct of an insatiable desire to win. It's who he is. And after saying he needs to work on his emotions, he'll say later that the day he loses that fire raging inside him is the day he quits.

...

He won't say it, but I'm sure Keenan thought John McCaw was going to hand him the keys to the castle... But for whatever reason, McCaw didn't want Keenan as general manager and gave the job to Burke... Keenan had been rejected - again. And again, he spent time asking himself why. Look at his record, he begs people. Forget all the other stuff for a moment. The horror stories from former players. The Heil Hitler salutes behind his back. Tales of an unquenchable thirst for power... And if winning is all that matters, who cares about the other stuff. It's just easy copy.

...

"Neil Smith [Ranger GM] didn't understand what it took to win," Keenan says now. "In our first meeting in July with the coaches, after I arrived, I asked Neil the question: 'Is this team good enough to win the Stanley Cup.' The answer from Neil was, 'Yes.' I said: 'How can you say that? Your team just missed the playoffs.' From that day on we were moving in opposite directions." Well, we all know what happened next. A Stanley Cup. An ugly departure from the Big Apple and then another, even uglier departure, down the road in St. Louis.

...

Soon players like Donald Brashear and Pavel Bure were telling Keenan to 'F--- off!' or challenging him to a fight on the bench... However, the nadir would occur in a between-periods tirade in St. Louis that Keenan levelled at Linden. Perhaps angry that his team was losing... the coach ripped into the ex-captain, questioning his courage and commitment, qualities Trevor Linden had always stood for. The profanity-laced diatribe shocked and sickened veterans in the room. They'd never seen anything like it. Keenan eventually went public with his condemnation of Linden's play and the popular ex- captain's departure was a foregone conclusion. "I'd never handle it that way if I had to do it over again," says Keenan of the St. Louis incident. "I was emotional with him. I should have said nothing, gone about my business, gone to ownership and said you should trade Trevor and let them decide." He stops. "It wasn't right. But I'm not perfect."

...

No one was happy with Keenan over the Linden debacle, including owner John McCaw. Maybe that's why the owner couldn't give Keenan the GM job, maybe because he felt there would be similar fiascos, only on a grander scale... Near the end of last season, after another night of futility, Keenan walked into the dressing room and smashed his stick against the wall. It was a dramatic gesture intended to leave an indelible mark on the team. A reminder for the summer that losing was unacceptable and they should never forget it. Instead, the blade of the stick went flying, nearly taking Dave Scatchard's head off. Players were furious. Brian Noonan told Keenan to get out of the room. Keenan shrugs.

"There's winning and there's misery," he says. Which pretty much sums up what it's like playing for him.

...

Brian Noonan, of all people, kicked Keenan out of the room. Noonan played for Keenan with four different teams. Even he knew this was garbage behavior from Keenan. Messier remained quiet and was always on Keenan's side.

The following three articles are from the 1998-99 season.

Canucks can't best betters: Like Avs, Dogs stall Keenan's win No. 500: [Final C Edition]
Jamieson, Jim. The Province [Vancouver, B.C] 19 Nov 1998: A84 / FRONT.

PHOENIX -- The beginning of their tour through the NHL's upper echelon is proving to be a sobering one for the Vancouver Canucks.

After losing a close one to the Colorado Avalanche on Sunday, the Canucks were outclassed 4-2 Wednesday by the Phoenix Coyotes as they failed for the second straight game to present coach Mike Keenan with his 500th NHL coaching victory. The Canucks fell to .500 at 8-8-1, while the Coyotes improved to 9-2-2.

...

This one was eerily reminiscent of the loss to the Avs, the Canucks losing it in the third period and getting dismembered by undisciplined penalties. Not that the deciding goals were scored with the man advantage, but the Canucks had expended so much energy holding the Coyotes at bay that there wasn't any gas left in the tank.

"We took too many undisciplined penalties again," said Keenan.

...

The penalty killing took its toll noticeably on team captain Mark Messier, who was forced to play 28:07 on Sunday against the Avs. Messier logged 20:10 Wednesday but was pointless, shotless and had four giveaways in 22 shifts.

...

"When you take that many penalties, you're not going to get any momentum going. We know we've got to be extra disciplined because the refs are looking for us now because we have a reputation as a gritty, tough team. We want to play our game but we can't overstep the boundaries either."

...

Keenan chose that juncture to yank Snow and replace him with backup Corey Hirsch. He later explained that the hook allowed Snow a little rest for tonight's game against Colorado in Denver, where Snow is expected to start.

"We have to look in the mirror and see what we're doing wrong here," said Snow. "This is two losses in a row and we've got to turn it around."

Canucks caught in the crossfire: As the team sinks Keenan speaks out in frustration: [Toronto Edition]
Gallagher, Tony. National Post [Don Mills, Ont] 31 Dec 1998: B16.

...

Keenan wants to win now. This is reasonable. He is the coach.

Brian Burke clearly doesn't feel the same way. When he said he "didn't care whether the team lost five in a row"with reference to the trading of Pavel Bure last month, he wasn't kidding.

He doesn't seem to care what happens to the product on the ice.

It appears he is willing to sacrifice the entire season to this macho, testosterone-induced act he has going to show how tough he can be.

He wants to show Bure and by extension all players how much in control of their lives he can be. It's as though he wants to rewrite the Collective Bargaining Agreement all by himself. But of course this has nothing to do with his job, which is to improve his team.

What we have now is a clash in philosophies. Keenan is pro- active. Burke is Pat Quinn. He will only act if he absolutely must.

This is what Keenan is trying to bring about, a situation whereby the GM must do something other than check the waiver wire.

...

Futile Canucks lose third in row : Frustrated coach Mike Keenan suggests he should be replaced if players refuse to heed his advice. They didn't Tuesday.: [Final Cc Edition]
Pap, Elliott. The Vancouver Sun [Vancouver, B.C] 30 Dec 1998: D1 / FRONT.

Mike Keenan is always sending messages but his latest, that his players might need a new coach, was a new twist even for him.

The Vancouver Canucks' head coach three times mentioned in his post-game discussion Tuesday night that perhaps he should be replaced if the team refuses to heed his advice.

"They've worked very hard and when they don't get results, they get tired of listening to you," Keenan said following the Canucks' third straight defeat, a 4-2 loss to the Colorado Avalanche. "They need a kick start or a new coach. I find it very disappointing when players won't listen to coaches' suggestions, particularly when they're not successful, and you might have some ideas that might help them. I'm not saying that sarcastically; I'm very serious. It's disconcerting for a coach when the players won't listen."

Keenan appeared almost beaten down as he attempted to explain away the Canucks' third loss since Christmas.

"You can only continue to preach it and practise it and hope that they'll buy into it some day," he said of the players' inability to generate offence by driving to the net. "They have to seem to find their own way or bottom out before they begin to accept what we ask them to do. Or they won't and then they'll have to fire the coach. That's how it works."

Keenan said he found it "unbelievable" that Colorado twice scored goals on Canuck line changes, which he blamed on a lack of mental preparation.

"They're not thinking, they're not sharp, they're not crisp, they're not paying attention," he said.

Canuck players appeared taken by surprise at Keenan's depressing tone but chalked it up to the misery of losing and Keenan's competitive nature.

"Mike wants to win and he's frustrated," said defenceman Bryan McCabe. "We just have to stick together as a team and that includes Mike..."

"I don't know what to say," added Mattias Ohlund.

...

Captain Mark Messier, who laboured again with his bad back, understands Keenan as well as anyone and suggested the coach spoke out of tremendous frustration.

"Mike is working on the mental skills you need to win," Messier said. "He drives a tough program and I think he's harder on himself than the players. When he loses, he takes it on himself."

Markus Naslund, now pointless in three games after an extremely hot streak, agreed with Messier's assessment.

"I'm sure you say stuff like that when you're frustrated," Naslund said. "It's a tough state right now because we've been struggling big time the last three games. I think we're all frustrated as well. We wanted to do the right things but it looked like we were tired out there."

...

He was fired a month later.

Keenan's time with the Canucks was not about rebuilding for the future. It was about winning now, moving players for short term success. He had no idea what he was doing, and he admits that a lot of his decisions were the product of mistakes on his part.

The whole Linden debacle was something he would not have done again, which meant Linden would probably have remained with the team if Keenan had not blown up. "I'd never handle it that way if I had to do it over again," said Keenan in December 1998. The 1997-98 season was not about the future. It was an attempt to pull some 1993-94 Rangers success. It failed miserably. Burke ended up doing a proper rebuild. Keenan's goal was to achieve immediate success at any cost. There were rumors that he was going to trade Markus Naslund, something I posted on the first page of this thread.

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=233101&postcount=10

I remember reading awhile back that Keenan almost dealt Naslund for next to nothing and was only prevented by an injury. Would someone that recalls the details of that story please re-post it?

He was almost dealt to the Sens for a mid-round pick, but Todd Bertuzzi got injured and the Canucks had to keep Naslund because they didn't have enough forwards.

The 1997-98 season was an all-or-nothing attempt to make the playoffs in which players were swapped simply for the sake of rejigging the lineup, sometimes irrationally, whenever Keenan became angry. At the same time he played mind games with the players by starting rumors and trying to break their spirits. To be honest, I don't think he had any clue what he was doing. Why didn't he just trade players without having to plant rumors? Was he trying to motivate them? It seems preventing them from galvanizing as a group gave him more authority. Players were still puzzled with his coaching method by the end of the year. In fact, they were furious with him.

The team was, for the most part, no better after the 1997-98 season than at the start of that year for the present or the future product. The Linden trade worked out, but Keenan truly had no idea what he was doing and he made a lot of enemies along the way. Messier was there helping Keenan with these decisions too, working to ship out players for ones who they thought would be of short term use to them. 1997-98 was a desperate attempt by Messier and Keenan to win, although Messier's own on-ice performance, ironically, completely lacked will. It could have turned out worse.

Trades may save management jobs, but don't look to the future: [Final Edition]
Gallagher, Tony. The Province [Vancouver, B.C] 08 Feb 1998: A74.

To push emotion aside and analyse the actions of the Vancouver Canucks Friday, think of Trevor Linden as a stock. They got him as seed and held him almost 10 years and over that period he rose to his zenith in 1994 and then trickled down to what is the lowest ebb of his career. At that point, rather than waiting for their stock to bounce back, the Canucks sold.

What was the rush? Why not wait until the trading deadline when many, many more teams looking to make a push for it all will be in the market seriously? Why not at least hope for a strong Olympic performance to get Linden's market value up from where it could only fetch Bryan McCabe and league laughing stock Todd Bertuzzi?

Clearly Mike Keenan and the rest of the Orca Bay types still are laboring under the belief they have a shot at sneaking into eighth place in the Western Conference for the pleasure of being blasted by Detroit or Dallas. That's a longer shot than Bertuzzi. Or are we watching some serious job preservation attempts by Keenan and Steve Tambellini, who know they must do something now and then try to persuade ownership they're making progress?

...

What have you done to the defence if you get McCabe and lose Jyrki Lumme, which is most likely given the circus situation here? Lumme likely will be traded at or near the deadline like Gerald Diduck was. And who can forget the immortal Bogdan Savenko whom the Canucks fetched in return in that deal?

What is most odd about the timing of these moves is that Iron Mike has to rely on all Pat Quinn's people for advice. Keenan is coaching a team. He hasn't had time to look at McCabe and Bertuzzi. He wouldn't know either one if he found them in one of his suits. He is not able to access the pro scouts he appointed in St. Louis who landed him all those good young players who presently inhabit the Blues lineup -- not unless there is something untoward going on.

He's having to use the eyes of Tambellini, who scouted McCabe and Bertuzzi a couple of times, and Quinn's cronies Murray Oliver and Rick Ley. The latter two thought getting Alexander Semak from the Isles was a good idea.

...

But turning Martin Gelinas into Brad May is hardly progress. And the four hockey people spoken to by this agent over the weekend all felt the Canucks could and should have gotten more for Linden. The Canucks are getting bigger and slower. If this should keep up and Alex Mogilny is flushed away in the paranoia to remake this team overnight, it won't be long before you have the Calgary Flames.

Yes, they likely will play .500 hockey or close to it the rest of the season. They may save some management jobs. But the way they're being formed in this frenzied, committee approach, the chances of ever being better than .500 are being frittered away.

Works Cited

Bell, Terry. "Time Isn't on Canucks' Side: Keenan's Crew Likely Needs 19 Wins in 25 Games." The Province: A35. Feb 23 1998. ProQuest. Web. 8 July 2015 .

Gallagher, Tony. "Canucks Caught in the Crossfire: As the Team Sinks Keenan Speaks Out in Frustration." National Post: B16. Dec 31 1998. ProQuest. Web. 8 July 2015 .

Gallagher, Tony. "Trades may Save Management Jobs, but Don't Look to the Future." The Province: A74. Feb 08 1998. ProQuest. Web. 8 July 2015 .

"Getting Candid with Keenan: The Day He Loses the Fire Raging within Him is the Day He'Ll Quit, Says Canucks' Coach Mike Keenan in Defence of His Controversial Style." The Vancouver Sun: C1 / FRONT. Oct 10 1998. ProQuest. Web. 8 July 2015 .

Gilchrist, Kent. "Iron Mike Aims for .500: Keenan Hasn't Improved Canucks since Taking Over." The Province: A38. Mar 23 1998. ProQuest. Web. 8 July 2015 .

Jamieson, Jim. "Canucks can't Best Betters: Like Avs, Dogs Stall Keenan's Win no. 500." The Province: A84 / FRONT. Nov 19 1998. ProQuest. Web. 8 July 2015 .

Jamieson, Jim. "Role Players New Target for Keenan." The Province: A60. Dec 22 1997. ProQuest. Web. 8 July 2015 .

Mason, Gary. "`Softer' Keenan Still mostly Iron:" The Vancouver Sun: C1 FRONT. Nov 22 1997. ProQuest. Web. 8 July 2015 .

Pap, Elliott. "Futile Canucks Lose Third in Row : Frustrated Coach Mike Keenan Suggests He should be Replaced if Players Refuse to Heed His Advice. they Didn't Tuesday." The Vancouver Sun: D1 / FRONT. Dec 30 1998. ProQuest. Web. 8 July 2015 .

 

[Mayor Bee]

Messier heard the boo birds this week and admitted he's having a hard time playing up to even his own standards, let alone the expectations of fans after signing a three-year, $20-million (U.S.) contract.

Vancouver fans shocked long-time observers Tuesday when they suddenly turned on Messier, 37, and booed him in the second period after the centre took the puck away from unsuspecting teammate Brian Noonan in the offensive zone against the New York Islanders. The play was innocent enough and the two players seemed to joke about it later on the bench.

But fans were in no mood for frivolity as they've come to expect much more from the veteran of 19 seasons in the National Hockey League. Messier is averaging less than a point a game for the first time since the 1984-85 season.

I was actually at the game in question. It was Trevor Linden's first game back in Vancouver after being unceremoniously traded, they played a fairly long video tribute before the game began, and there was a funny mood in the crowd. Emotions were high.

Vancouver carried play during the 1st but it looked like they were in slow motion; it was tied 1-1 after the initial period. Tommy Salo took a penalty in a scuffle, so Vancouver would begin the second period on the power play.

Messier was out there for a good chunk of the power play, and it was just a sorry excuse of a power play. It looked like no one on the ice actually wanted to be there at all, like five guys in white were just floating around four guys in blue. At least the Islanders had an excuse: they were bad.

So Noonan has what finally looks like an open shot, and Messier takes the puck off his stick. The puck was being followed by the camera that was feeding the Jumbotron, so 18,000 people got to see Messier not only do this, but then continue floating around the offensive zone with this stupid-ass expression on his face. I can't even describe it; it was like an open-mouthed smirk. No shot was taken, the puck was cleared out, and he floated off the ice at glacial speed.

So there was this juxtaposition that was taking place. Linden, who had been there when times were bad and led the team to its greatest moments and greatest shot at glory, making his return...and the home fans seeing the new captain, leader of the new faction that broke up that beloved team, looking and acting like he didn't give a damn about the game on the ice. The team was miles out of the playoff hunt, young guys were playing for their jobs, older guys were playing to just hang on a bit longer, and here's the guy who was supposed to be the savior demonstrating what certainly looked like open contempt for everyone: the people who paid to see it, the opponents for just floating around them, and his teammates for killing a scoring chance and turning it into nothing. Messier and Noonan apparently thought it was funny, so at least two people got a laugh out of it while everyone else seethed.

Then the Canucks scored three quick goals, and Salo took a misconduct when he was pulled after the third one...smashed and broke his stick over the crossbar, then chucked it down the ice in the direction of the officials.

 

[DisgruntledGoat*]

I was actually at the game in question. It was Trevor Linden's first game back in Vancouver after being unceremoniously traded, they played a fairly long video tribute before the game began, and there was a funny mood in the crowd. Emotions were high.

Vancouver carried play during the 1st but it looked like they were in slow motion; it was tied 1-1 after the initial period. Tommy Salo took a penalty in a scuffle, so Vancouver would begin the second period on the power play.

Messier was out there for a good chunk of the power play, and it was just a sorry excuse of a power play. It looked like no one on the ice actually wanted to be there at all, like five guys in white were just floating around four guys in blue. At least the Islanders had an excuse: they were bad.

So Noonan has what finally looks like an open shot, and Messier takes the puck off his stick. The puck was being followed by the camera that was feeding the Jumbotron, so 18,000 people got to see Messier not only do this, but then continue floating around the offensive zone with this stupid-ass expression on his face. I can't even describe it; it was like an open-mouthed smirk. No shot was taken, the puck was cleared out, and he floated off the ice at glacial speed.

So there was this juxtaposition that was taking place. Linden, who had been there when times were bad and led the team to its greatest moments and greatest shot at glory, making his return...and the home fans seeing the new captain, leader of the new faction that broke up that beloved team, looking and acting like he didn't give a damn about the game on the ice. The team was miles out of the playoff hunt, young guys were playing for their jobs, older guys were playing to just hang on a bit longer, and here's the guy who was supposed to be the savior demonstrating what certainly looked like open contempt for everyone: the people who paid to see it, the opponents for just floating around them, and his teammates for killing a scoring chance and turning it into nothing. Messier and Noonan apparently thought it was funny, so at least two people got a laugh out of it while everyone else seethed.

Then the Canucks scored three quick goals, and Salo took a misconduct when he was pulled after the third one...smashed and broke his stick over the crossbar, then chucked it down the ice in the direction of the officials.

Stuff like this and the guy posting 'the superfan' article (seriously?) are why none of this Messier in Vancouver stuff has any crediblity.

 

[quoipourquoi]

Let's be careful not to take shots at each other. Everyone is entitled to an opinion.

 

[The Panther]

Let's be careful not to take shots at each other. Everyone is entitled to an opinion.

Everyone is indeed entitled to an opinion, but do one-sided and mean-spirited (not to mention intellectually-challenged) threads like this really need to be revived again and again?

I could start a thread on why the Vancouver Canucks are the most "loser" franchise ever (for which there's actual tangible evidence), but (a) I wouldn't, because it's uncalled for, and (b) if I did, I wouldn't revive the thread every 3 months.

 

[JA]

Stuff like this and the guy posting 'the superfan' article (seriously?) are why none of this Messier in Vancouver stuff has any crediblity.

Considering your affection for Mark Messier at his best -- and who wouldn't appreciate him when he was an Edmonton Oiler or in his first New York Ranger stint -- it's understandable that you might feel this way.

Messier was not that same player or even person in Vancouver. Both he and Keenan are to blame. Keenan's presence made things worse in 1997-98, but of course Messier participated in that entire debacle while providing the most ridiculously ironic performances on the ice. There is plenty enough evidence in this thread alone to understand the situation. Those who experienced this era have a particular insight.

Everyone is indeed entitled to an opinion, but do one-sided and mean-spirited (not to mention intellectually-challenged) threads like this really need to be revived again and again?

I could start a thread on why the Vancouver Canucks are the most "loser" franchise ever (for which there's actual tangible evidence), but (a) I wouldn't, because it's uncalled for, and (b) if I did, I wouldn't revive the thread every 3 months.

This is Hockey History. I think it is fair to investigate an historical period that might not be known to a large percentage of hockey observers. We've kept this to one particular thread, and based on some responses this topic requires further development. In the last few days we've expanded on the issues of the buyout, examined the fanbase's relationship with him between 1997 and 2000, and further explored Mike Keenan's coaching philosophy ("win now!") and approach to the 1997-98 season so that we may understand that a "rebuild" was not intentional or in Keenan and Messier's vocabulary at the time. We have explored the degree to which the franchise's value increased during the span of Messier's contract with the Canucks, investigated the team's financial situation in the McCaw years, and we have looked at yearly attendance during that period.

 

[Captain Bowie]

Everyone is indeed entitled to an opinion, but do one-sided and mean-spirited (not to mention intellectually-challenged) threads like this really need to be revived again and again?

I could start a thread on why the Vancouver Canucks are the most "loser" franchise ever (for which there's actual tangible evidence), but (a) I wouldn't, because it's uncalled for, and (b) if I did, I wouldn't revive the thread every 3 months.

Nope you'd just be there to throw pot shots at everyone disagreeing with you when it does. If you really, really, really don't think the thread, leave it alone and give JetsAlternate less posts to challenege with articles.

 

[DisgruntledGoat*]

Those who experienced this era have a particular insight.

Ahh, yes. The old, 'whatever, you don't know what it was like!' comment. I swear, every time this subject comes up, it follows the same cycle: conjecture. Requests for evidence. This.

I'm not taking a shot. I've said this before. In this thread.

There is plenty enough evidence in this thread alone to understand the situation.

There is zero evidence in this thread. There is you posting walls of text from old newspapers, then making tenuous, at best, leaps in logic.

This is Hockey History. I think it is fair to investigate an historical period that might not be known to a large percentage of hockey observers.

Seriously? There hasn't been a mention of Messier on these boards without these old myths being trotted out.

 

[Mayor Bee]

Stuff like this and the guy posting 'the superfan' article (seriously?) are why none of this Messier in Vancouver stuff has any crediblity.

For the life of me, I can't understand why uninvolved parties feel the need to defend someone where he cannot be defended.

Messier is revered as some type of demigod in Edmonton and New York; good for him. It doesn't mean that he was anywhere close to that in Vancouver, as anyone who was a fan of the team at the time can verify.

Since the time that Bure arrived in Vancouver, the team had done the following:
1991-92 - 96 points, made playoffs, lost in 2nd round
1992-93 - 101 points, made playoffs, lost in 2nd round
1993-94 - 85 points, made playoffs, lost in SCF
1994-95 - 48 points, made playoffs, lost in second round
1995-96 - 79 points, made playoffs, lost in first round
1996-97 - 77 points, missed playoffs (Bure missed 19 games and wasn't close to recovered from his knee injury)

Even in the latter couple of years, it wasn't a bad team at all. The defense needed retooled desperately; they had Ohlund coming over, they had Lumme in his prime, and Hedican was emerging. After that was a collection of bottom-pairing guys, like a washed-up Dave Babych and an obscenely slow Chris McAllister.

In 1997-98, the team had an early 10-game losing streak that cost Tom Renney his job. Barely a month later, they had a 5-game streak. That was followed shortly after by an 18-game stretch that saw them win one single game (1-13-4). They were sitting 12-32-8 at that point and were less than four years removed from the run to the Stanley Cup Final.

When the game I mentioned was played, played March 24 1998, the Canucks were 21-37-13. They were going to miss the playoffs in spectacular fashion, the longtime captain and fan favorite Linden had been traded, two major links to the SCF team in McLean and Gelinas (who had 35 goals just the year prior) were traded. The Canucks had made five trades that month alone, and that very day made another one by shipping out another SCF holdover in Babych.

There was no plan at all, just throwing crap against the wall and seeing what stuck. The goalies weren't playing well; McLean was traded as part of a deal for Sean Burke, then Burke was traded less than two months later for Garth Snow. Geoff Sanderson was part of the McLean/Burke trade, and only lasted a month before he was sent out for Brad May. Enrico Ciccone was the last part of that trade; he was gone two months later for Jamie Huscroft.

Mike Sillinger was gone for a 6th-round pick that later became a 5th, then Peter Zezel was brought in. The team got 7 years older, dropped 20 draft positions, and made no improvement at that spot. The defense was banged up, and Grant Ledyard was traded for an 8th-rounder. Gino Odjick was traded for Jason Strudwick.

So you have Keenan pulling the strings on all of this, and Messier publicly backing him. Gee, I wonder why the fans didn't much care for this? A team four years removed from the SCF has been totally gutted from top to bottom, the team is substantially worse than they were before, there was no direction or plan for any of the transaction wire madness that was taking place, and you wonder why fans were upset at the guy who basically was a package deal with the guy who was regarded as responsible for all this?

Look, this isn't a fight for the Rangers' or Oilers' fans. Messier in Vancouver could not have been further removed from those days. That was the issue. Vancouver fans had been tormented for 12 years by Messier as an Oiler, he finally goes as far away as possible and then still crushes the Canucks, and he did it all as a top-level player who'd do anything to win. Messier in Vancouver looked like a guy who was only interested in suiting up to collect a paycheck. It doesn't reflect one bit on his time in the other two cities.

(I regard this as no different than listening to a bunch of Flyers and Kings fans telling us CBJ fans about "the real Jeff Carter". We saw him before, we saw him after, and we saw how unbelievably pathetically he played for our team. What he did before and after is irrelevant to watching a previously top-level guy as the focal point of a miserable time while also playing like garbage.)

 

[The Panther]

I think you've got the wrong end of the stick. I don't see anybody in this (overlong) thread saying that Messier was great in Vancouver. I myself have already said, about 8 times in this thread, that he wasn't good in Vancouver. Everybody, including Messier's fans, knows this.

What we ARE saying is that Messier alone is not to blame for the franchise's abysmal record during his 3 seasons there. The main people to blame are Canucks' management (and, IMO, Trevor Linden, for reasons I've already stated about 46 pages ago).

Also, you're way under-stating how dysfunctional the Canucks' team was in 1996-97, before Messier arrived. Even the New York media in 1996-97 were aware of the dysfunction in the Canucks' dressing room. The team was heading into a lull and a re-build, and everybody except Canucks' management knew it. Signing Messier was a terrible move, as anyone could have told them.

So, in fact, nobody is saying that Messier played well (although he wasn't that bad either -- let's pause to remember he was team MVP one season). What we're saying is that things like his contract, Linden's losing the 'C', re-using uniform #11, hiring Mike Keenan, etc. are all NOT Messier's fault. Messier's presence was one of the expressions of a totally dysfunctional management team that had no idea what it was doing.

 

[saskganesh]

This is Hockey History. I think it is fair to investigate an historical period that might not be known to a large percentage of hockey observers. We've kept this to one particular thread, and based on some responses this topic requires further development. In the last few days we've expanded on the issues of the buyout, examined the fanbase's relationship with him between 1997 and 2000, and further explored Mike Keenan's coaching philosophy ("win now!") and approach to the 1997-98 season so that we may understand that a "rebuild" was not intentional or in Keenan and Messier's vocabulary at the time. We have explored the degree to which the franchise's value increased during the span of Messier's contract with the Canucks, investigated the team's financial situation in the McCaw years, and we have looked at yearly attendance during that period.

I think you've done some good work here, but keep in mind that some of the articles are by Tony Gallagher, whose name doesn't resonate with integrity. YMMV.

Moving on, see if you can find back some back issues of Business in Vancouver...during the Keenan period, it seems there was a sizeable exodus of off ice staff towards greener pastures. Check the on the move section, or whatever they called it. It seems that a lot of the old Griffiths/Northwest hires didn't like working for the new regime.

That bleeding stopped when Burke, a familiar face, was brought back.

 

[quoipourquoi]

a "rebuild" was not intentional or in Keenan and Messier's vocabulary at the time.

I'm going to disagree on that. Getting rid of Linden and McLean and the country club crew absolutely is a rebuild - and it's one that didn't go over well with the super-fans like Andrew Castell. Because when a team like the 1994 Vancouver Canucks becomes as iconic as it did, no one wants to see the milk go sour. It wasn't a franchise that was one missing piece away from being a contender as many overly-optimistic people believed; it was a franchise that needed an overhaul. And the outsiders who drove the change were blamed (even though it was healthy for the franchise), because people shoot messengers.

With or without the Mark Messier signing, the 1997-98 Vancouver Canucks were going to be a horrible team. It's just easier to blame the under-performing newcomer than the diminishing talents of the players who missed their window for a championship.

This is from a year ago, and it was all that ever needed to be said on the topic:

no one in vancouver wants to or cares to look at messier's career here objectively. how many times do i have to type "potvin sucks" in this thread? hating messier -- some deserved, some undeserved, a lot of it in grey areas between those two extremes -- is cultural.

That's the answer to the question of why Mark Messier is hated. He's the scapegoat for breaking up the band that hadn't been playing the right notes in years.

Would it have been awesome if Todd Bertuzzi and Sean Burke had performed at the level in 1998 that they would go on to become in 2002? Absolutely. Everyone wants their rebuild to last one week so that the fans don't lose hope and everyone wins championships, but it doesn't always work that way. Let's not minimize how great some of those moves were for the team just because Zezel didn't pan out and Todd Bertuzzi didn't peak the day after New York was fleeced.

And also don't pretend that the whole outside fans just don't understand argument is going to fly when there is a split in opinion on Mark Messier's performance between an emotional fan-base who loved the 1994 Canucks a little too much and the new management who wanted Messier back in 2000-01. They're not fans from New York and Edmonton; they ARE the Vancouver Canucks, and they wanted Mark Messier at $4 million.


Is there anything of actual value left to be contributed on this topic, or is this going to continue to go in circles with repeated statistics and repeated newspaper clippings only to be re-bumped or closed/re-opened every time there's important new information that isn't that important but it keeps the ever-growing and completely one-sided original post alive for newcomers to see?

Seriously, JetsAlternate, this thread was bumped after five months of dormancy so you could remind us that Mark Messier liked money. Come on.

 

[JA]

Ahh, yes. The old, 'whatever, you don't know what it was like!' comment. I swear, every time this subject comes up, it follows the same cycle: conjecture. Requests for evidence. This.

I'm not taking a shot. I've said this before. In this thread.



There is zero evidence in this thread. There is you posting walls of text from old newspapers, then making tenuous, at best, leaps in logic.



Seriously? There hasn't been a mention of Messier on these boards without these old myths being trotted out.

Let's try to clear up some confusion then. If you can identify what you believe is only a myth, we can work towards investigating the particular issue(s) that you are unsure about.

The events that have been discussed in this thread with regards to Messier's conduct have all been documented and made public by people who had direct contact with Messier. None of the information detailed here can simply be labelled a "myth." Pat Quinn's statements, for instance, that Messier had direct input into the decisions made about roster players is no myth. The behavior of Mike Keenan and the various incidents have all been documented and none of them are only myths. They are all from the immediate time period in which these incidents took place too, so there is no trouble with time and memory loss distorting the information in these documents.

 

[quoipourquoi]

The events that have been discussed in this thread with regards to Messier's conduct have all been documented and made public by people who had direct contact with Messier. None of the information detailed here can simply be labelled a "myth."

DisgruntledGoat appears to be referring to the perception being a myth, not the actual events that occurred. I know you're striving for an objective piece ("purely informative"), but a lot of it is relying on subjective commentary. Just because something is printed in a newspaper does not mean that it is a fact and not the opinion of a writer or a player or a super-fan.

 

[Captain Bowie]

I'm going to disagree on that. Getting rid of Linden and McLean and the country club crew absolutely is a rebuild - and it's one that didn't go over well with the super-fans like Andrew Castell. Because when a team like the 1994 Vancouver Canucks becomes as iconic as it did, no one wants to see the milk go sour. It wasn't a franchise that was one missing piece away from being a contender as many overly-optimistic people believed; it was a franchise that needed an overhaul. And the outsiders who drove the change were blamed (even though it was healthy for the franchise), because people shoot messengers.

With or without the Mark Messier signing, the 1997-98 Vancouver Canucks were going to be a horrible team. It's just easier to blame the under-performing newcomer than the diminishing talents of the players who missed their window for a championship.

This is from a year ago, and it was all that ever needed to be said on the topic:



That's the answer to the question of why Mark Messier is hated. He's the scapegoat for breaking up the band that hadn't been playing the right notes in years.

Would it have been awesome if Todd Bertuzzi and Sean Burke had performed at the level in 1998 that they would go on to become in 2002? Absolutely. Everyone wants their rebuild to last one week so that the fans don't lose hope and everyone wins championships, but it doesn't always work that way. Let's not minimize how great some of those moves were for the team just because Zezel didn't pan out and Todd Bertuzzi didn't peak the day after New York was fleeced.

And also don't pretend that the whole outside fans just don't understand argument is going to fly when there is a split in opinion on Mark Messier's performance between an emotional fan-base who loved the 1994 Canucks a little too much and the new management who wanted Messier back in 2000-01. They're not fans from New York and Edmonton; they ARE the Vancouver Canucks, and they wanted Mark Messier at $4 million.


Is there anything of actual value left to be contributed on this topic, or is this going to continue to go in circles with repeated statistics and repeated newspaper clippings only to be re-bumped or closed/re-opened every time there's important new information that isn't that important but it keeps the ever-growing and completely one-sided original post alive for newcomers to see?

Seriously, JetsAlternate, this thread was bumped after five months of dormancy so you could remind us that Mark Messier liked money. Come on.

And apparently all it comes down to is the feelings of the fans of the Canucks are disillusioned or invalid because... outside objectiveism says it is. Love the little dig at us loving the 94 team too much. Sad little Canucks fans whose most memorable team to date was a bunch of losers. What pathetic people. They don't even deserve to have their own feelings about something they experienced and we didn't. We better make sure they know we think their thoughts and feelings are invalid. Over and over and over again.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Here's an AP article from 2000 about the Messier buyout that mentions their "faint hope" of bringing him back for less money:
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/canucks-buy-out-messier/

 

[quoipourquoi]

And apparently all it comes down to is the feelings of the fans of the Canucks are disillusioned or invalid because... outside objectiveism says it is. Love the little dig at us loving the 94 team too much. Sad little Canucks fans whose most memorable team to date was a bunch of losers. What pathetic people. They don't even deserve to have their own feelings about something they experienced and we didn't. We better make sure they know we think their thoughts and feelings are invalid. Over and over and over again.

Part of the original post says "the organization did the unthinkable and traded away all of the fan favorite players, including the beloved long-time captain, Trevor Linden. Keenan traded away Linden, Gino Odjick, Kirk McLean, Martin Gelinas, and Dave Babych that season, leaving the Canucks with barely any of its previous personality." I don't think I'm out of line in pointing out that many in Vancouver really liked that group of players and were hurt when they were moved. I mean, we even have a newspaper article about a super-fan that said as much...

And I didn't say that you don't deserve to have opinions. I said that it's silly of MS and Mayor Bee to talk about "uninvolved parties" who "know absolutely nothing" when the actual Vancouver Canucks wanted Mark Messier at $4 million. Because that's a damn good reason to think that the Vancouver fan perception is overblown. If Mark Messier was a cancer, why does Vancouver want him at $4 million? Not an Oiler fan. Not a Ranger fan. The Vancouver Canucks.

I mean, you're welcome to point out exactly where I said you're not allowed to have an opinion if you think that's what I said. I said it's ridiculous to try to deny others their opinions, especially when the Vancouver Canucks themselves are about as far removed from being uninvolved parties who know absolutely nothing as it gets. I said basically the opposite of what you're saying I did.

 

[Killion]

....Over and over and over again.

..... ok ok..... everyone please just calm down.

 

[Captain Bowie]

Part of the original post says "the organization did the unthinkable and traded away all of the fan favorite players, including the beloved long-time captain, Trevor Linden. Keenan traded away Linden, Gino Odjick, Kirk McLean, Martin Gelinas, and Dave Babych that season, leaving the Canucks with barely any of its previous personality." I don't think I'm out of line in pointing out that many in Vancouver really liked that group of players and were hurt when they were moved. I mean, we even have a newspaper article about a super-fan that said as much...

And I didn't say that you don't deserve to have opinions. I said that it's silly of MS and Mayor Bee to talk about "uninvolved parties" who "know absolutely nothing" when the actual Vancouver Canucks wanted Mark Messier at $4 million. Because that's a damn good reason to think that the Vancouver fan perception is overblown. If Mark Messier was a cancer, why does Vancouver want him at $4 million? Not an Oiler fan. Not a Ranger fan. The Vancouver Canucks.

I mean, you're welcome to point out exactly where I said you're not allowed to have an opinion if you think that's what I said. I said it's ridiculous to try to deny others their opinions, especially when the Vancouver Canucks themselves are about as far removed from being uninvolved parties who know absolutely nothing as it gets. I said basically the opposite of what you're saying I did.

I don't think you really know what you're saying with the bolded. The Fan perception of the fans perception is overblown?

The argument isn't "Here is why Messier was hated by Management". Rather it's "Here's why Messier is hated by the FANS".

In the end it doesn't really matter if you think the reasons why Canucks fans hate Messier are valid, and really it doesn't matter if there even are. This thread, if nothing else, should clear up OUR reasons for hating him. Of course their not going to be objective, they are in fact inherently subjective.

But none of that can stop yourself or Panther or anyone else from taking pot shots at Canucks fans for feeling the way they do. Or loving the 94 team. Or Loving Trevor Linden. Or hating Messier/Keenan. Whatever. We're used to it. We've never gotten respect and we never will.