Mando27 Posted January 11 Share Posted January 11 Hard to say to be honest, also I feel like cup windows in general are way smaller than most people think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Biestra Posted January 11 Share Posted January 11 57 minutes ago, Mando27 said: Hard to say to be honest, also I feel like cup windows in general are way smaller than most people think. Yeah as it turned out it was literally one year in the 80s, didn't last anywhere near as long as I thought it would with the Linden 90s teams, and then the Sedin teams...two years really? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HKSR Posted January 11 Share Posted January 11 1 hour ago, Mando27 said: Hard to say to be honest, also I feel like cup windows in general are way smaller than most people think. 55 minutes ago, Kevin Biestra said: Yeah as it turned out it was literally one year in the 80s, didn't last anywhere near as long as I thought it would with the Linden 90s teams, and then the Sedin teams...two years really? I think the difference this time around is how big of a swing the team has made from the bottom dwellers of the league to literally battling for top spot overall. Usually there was a bit of a transition. It's like the window just swung open with an elite team and away we go. The other piece is this core is young. They still have plenty of prime years ahead of them, especially Petey and Hughes. The twins were in their early 30s when the Canucks were dominating the league. And no offence to Linden, but other than Bure, that early 90s team didn't have high end elite talent. They were a team built on toughness and hard work. The 1994 run was a culmination of that hard work and chemistry coming together at the right time. I love that 94 team, but realistically they didn't have the firepower that the 2010 and this team has. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Biestra Posted January 11 Share Posted January 11 (edited) 11 minutes ago, HKSR said: I think the difference this time around is how big of a swing the team has made from the bottom dwellers of the league to literally battling for top spot overall. Usually there was a bit of a transition. It's like the window just swung open with an elite team and away we go. The other piece is this core is young. They still have plenty of prime years ahead of them, especially Petey and Hughes. The twins were in their early 30s when the Canucks were dominating the league. And no offence to Linden, but other than Bure, that early 90s team didn't have high end elite talent. They were a team built on toughness and hard work. The 1994 run was a culmination of that hard work and chemistry coming together at the right time. I love that 94 team, but realistically they didn't have the firepower that the 2010 and this team has. The Canucks were 2nd last in the NHL in 1990, had a middling year in 1991 and then were powerhouses in 1992 and 1993. Granted that's one transition year instead of zero but it's almost as sudden. I don't think the 1994 Canucks were inferior to the 2011 Canucks in terms of talent really. The 2011 team had two 100 point players in the Sedins. The 1994 team had a better 100 point player in Bure and then some 70-80ish point guys like Linden and Ronning and Courtnall and then more 50-70 point guys in Adams and Craven. As opposed to 2011 which had Kesler (great player but never got to 80 points) and then...Samuelsson and Burrows. 1994 also had equal or better on defense I think. Nobody on 2011 compared to Jeff Brown in offensive ability and then there were Lumme and Babych as well. 1994's playoff McLean was as good as Luongo ever was and probably better than Luongo ever was...and McLean was a Vezina finalist twice outside of 1994. Edited January 11 by Kevin Biestra Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnthonyG Posted January 11 Share Posted January 11 Imo 7 years, Thats the max window with this core. 4-5 years will take us through the peak prime years and then 2-3 years of the plateau, before the decline. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HKSR Posted January 11 Share Posted January 11 8 minutes ago, Kevin Biestra said: The Canucks were 2nd last in the NHL in 1990, had a middling year in 1991 and then were powerhouses in 1992 and 1993. Granted that's one transition year instead of zero but it's almost as sudden. I don't think the 1994 Canucks were inferior to the 2011 Canucks in terms of talent really. The 2011 team had two 100 point players in the Sedins. The 1994 team had a better 100 point player in Bure and then some 70-80ish point guys like Linden and Ronning and Courtnall and then more 50-70 point guys in Adams and Craven. As opposed to 2011 which had Kesler (great player but never got to 80 points) and then...Samuelsson and Burrows. 1994 also had equal or better on defense I think. Nobody on 2011 compared to Jeff Brown in offensive ability and then there were Lumme and Babych as well. 1994's playoff McLean was as good as Luongo ever was and probably better than Luongo ever was...and McLean was a Vezina finalist twice outside of 1994. The 1994 team is still my favourite Canucks team of all time, so it's hard for me to even go down this path, but the 2011 team had higher end talent. You can't compare point totals from different generations. The average goals per game in the NHL in the early 1990s was 3.4 to 3.6 goals per game vs the 2010 era of 2.7 goals per game. That's 25% to 30% more goals per game in the early 90s. The 2011 team had two 100 point scorers that also happened to include the Art Ross trophy winner. Literally the 2 top offensive forwards in the entire NHL was on that team. Also the best defensive forward who also happened to be a 40 goal man. The facts are that 2011 team was the best team in the entire NHL and dominated every facet of the game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coolboarder Posted January 11 Share Posted January 11 (edited) I remember in 2011 run and 2012 years, I thought we'd be a contender for years and years to come and it didn't happen. Our Cup window were so short that we collapsed quicker than the Wings, Avs, Pens, Hawks, and Ducks ever did during their Cup contender years. That is why I'm not taking this for granted ever again. Let's stay wide open for long time but the cap world doesn't allow for that anymore and no guessing on how long the windows would be open. It could be short or long, depending on how the management do in near future with 11 expiring contract and we are not bringing them all back unless there'd be a discount and I doubt that it will happen. There are no discounts in this business. Edited January 11 by coolboarder Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HKSR Posted January 11 Share Posted January 11 (edited) 14 hours ago, coolboarder said: I remember in 2011 run and 2012 years, I thought we'd be a contender for years and years to come and it didn't happen. Our Cup window were so short that we collapsed quicker than the Wings, Avs, Pens, Hawks, and Ducks ever did during their Cup contender years. That is why I'm not taking this for granted ever again. Let's stay wide open for long time but the cap world doesn't allow for that anymore and no guessing on how long the windows would be open. It could be short or long, depending on how the management do in near future with 11 expiring contract and we are not bringing them all back unless there'd be a discount and I doubt that it will happen. There are no discounts in this business. I think most people forget that the window for that team was open around 2008-09 and lasted about 4 to 5 years. 2008-09: 1st in Division -- lost to Blackhawks 2009-10: 1st in Division -- lost to Blackhawks 2010-11: 1st in League -- slayed the dragon 2011-12: 1st in League -- Lost to LAK (Stanley Cup Champs) 2012-13: 1st in Division -- Lost to SJS (swept actually) Window over... The thing is, that team went where the Sedins went. They were already 29 when they went for their 1st playoff run as a top tier team. This time around, we go where Petey and Hughes take us. They are 24 and 25 years old for their 1st true playoff run as a top tier team. That's where this is exciting. The window should last longer, which means more opportunity to contend for the Cup. Edited January 11 by HKSR Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coolboarder Posted January 11 Share Posted January 11 40 minutes ago, HKSR said: I think most people forget that the window for that team was open around 2008-09 and lasted about 4 to 5 years. 2008-09: 1st in Division -- lost to Blackhawks 2009-10: 1st in Division -- lost to Blackhawks 2010-11: 1st in League -- slayed the dragon 2011-12: 1st in League -- Lost to LAK (Stanley Cup Champs) 2012-13: 1st in Division -- Lost to SJS (swept actually) Window over... The thing is, that team went where the Sedins went. They were already 29 when they went for their 1st playoff run as a top tier team. This time around, we go where Petey and Hughes take us. They are 24 and 25 years old for their 1st true playoff run as a top tier team. That's where this is exciting. The window should last longer, which means more opportunity to contend for the Cup. True but during these years, we weren't expected to win the Cup but maybe win a round or two. We lacked scoring depth before the President Trophy years. Keeping in mind, Wings, Avs, Devils, Pens, Bruins, and the Hawks lasted more than 5 years, 8-10 years. We were expected to last more than just 5 years and not far removed from back to back president trophy winner and we collapsed far quicker with same core we have had in in short window. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DownUndaCanuck Posted January 11 Share Posted January 11 Obviously when Miller starts to regress (who knows when, 33-35?) then we'll have to have another center come in to replace him. We don't really have a future scoring center in our mix. Raty is nice but ways off it seems and really will be a middle-6 center at best. Maybe he can be a 50 point shutdown center and Petey take the 1C role eventually? Would be nice to have an offensive center threat in our pipeline, say a young 18-19 year old but our draft pick next year is going to be far too low to count. I'd say we've got a good 5 years right now, the window is officially open in my books and not just playoff window but cup contending window and it came very suddenly so we've got to grab it by the balls. We can either go gung-ho and buy (sell prospects/picks) to inflate that window, or try a slower build where we keep developing our own prospects and picks and hope they replace our stars. Problem with that is that we'll never have such top end talent peaking all at once like they are now. I'd almost lean towards buy hard and go hard for these next 5 years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barn Burner Posted January 11 Share Posted January 11 18 hours ago, HKSR said: I think the difference this time around is how big of a swing the team has made from the bottom dwellers of the league to literally battling for top spot overall. Usually there was a bit of a transition. It's like the window just swung open with an elite team and away we go. The other piece is this core is young. They still have plenty of prime years ahead of them, especially Petey and Hughes. The twins were in their early 30s when the Canucks were dominating the league. And no offence to Linden, but other than Bure, that early 90s team didn't have high end elite talent. They were a team built on toughness and hard work. The 1994 run was a culmination of that hard work and chemistry coming together at the right time. I love that 94 team, but realistically they didn't have the firepower that the 2010 and this team has. True, and when you factor in our coaching staff, including Clark, we are clearly in a fantastic position. Not planning any parades, but I want to enjoy the experience of our team finally being in a position to challenge, again. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HKSR Posted January 11 Share Posted January 11 1 hour ago, coolboarder said: True but during these years, we weren't expected to win the Cup but maybe win a round or two. We lacked scoring depth before the President Trophy years. Keeping in mind, Wings, Avs, Devils, Pens, Bruins, and the Hawks lasted more than 5 years, 8-10 years. We were expected to last more than just 5 years and not far removed from back to back president trophy winner and we collapsed far quicker with same core we have had in in short window. I think once your elite talent reaches a point where they are no longer producing at that high level, the window is done. The Sedins were pretty old already by the time 2010/11 rolled around (talking 31 years old). Personally, I didn't think we'd have that many years for that window with the Sedins already in their early 30s. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HKSR Posted January 11 Share Posted January 11 52 minutes ago, DownUndaCanuck said: Obviously when Miller starts to regress (who knows when, 33-35?) then we'll have to have another center come in to replace him. We don't really have a future scoring center in our mix. Raty is nice but ways off it seems and really will be a middle-6 center at best. Maybe he can be a 50 point shutdown center and Petey take the 1C role eventually? Would be nice to have an offensive center threat in our pipeline, say a young 18-19 year old but our draft pick next year is going to be far too low to count. I'd say we've got a good 5 years right now, the window is officially open in my books and not just playoff window but cup contending window and it came very suddenly so we've got to grab it by the balls. We can either go gung-ho and buy (sell prospects/picks) to inflate that window, or try a slower build where we keep developing our own prospects and picks and hope they replace our stars. Problem with that is that we'll never have such top end talent peaking all at once like they are now. I'd almost lean towards buy hard and go hard for these next 5 years. That's one of the types of players I would consider for Lekkerimaki. As much as I love JL's shot, I think if you can find a similar potential centre for Lek, it'd be worth considering a trade. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Crossbar Posted January 11 Share Posted January 11 We're disrupting conventional thought and perception of how long a turnaround takes - most people were dead wrong - so I wouldn't be surprised that our window defies the conventional answer to this question Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.