Jess Posted March 30 Share Posted March 30 3 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said: Prime Bure in Vancouver is probably one of the 20 greatest players of all time… Prime Bure in Florida was scoring almost 60 goals when no one else was even scoring 50. Bure scored 60 with the Canucks when 60 goals was almost common, especially in 1992-93. In 1999-00, he scored 58 and the next highest had 44 goals. In 2000-01, he had 59 goals and only two others hit 50 and 4th place had 45 goals. There were nine fifty goal scorers in 1993-94 and a staggering 14 in 1992-93. I maintain that Bure was at his peak during those two years in Florida. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldFaithfulcap Posted March 30 Share Posted March 30 Naslund, great player but wasn't ever dominant in the postseason. Sedins i'd put next. If we win a cup then all these guys are going to be demoted as that's how it goes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chon derry Posted March 30 Share Posted March 30 How about they just pay homage to the player and his number and just stop retiring numbers. Gretzkys number is league wide but if you think about it if you can’t use a number because a team has retired the number out of respect for said player then that also makes its league wide. It’s also not fair to a player who wants to use it. He also could turn out to be a better player than the one who is behind the retirment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ballisticsports Posted March 30 Share Posted March 30 9 hours ago, The Brock Star said: I don’t think it’s too big of a hot take to say that Bure could’ve hit 800 if he stayed healthy. The fact that he scored 59 and 58 in two of the lowest scoring seasons in NHL history is still absolutely incredible. Hmm maybe having a career +42 only with all the goals scored says something? He was dynamic and entertaining when he had the puck though Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Petey the Puck Whisperer Posted March 30 Share Posted March 30 16 hours ago, Toni Zamboni said: Daniel Sedin yup. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe King Posted March 30 Share Posted March 30 Unretire them all. I think players can be honoured for being great with a nice banner. Even 99 should be unretired. New young players can show appreciation for their hockey hero's by wearing their hero's numbers. Just my opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maniwaki Canuck Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 Unretire them all but if we have to single people out, then Smyl has to be first up. Loved the guy from his NW days and was heart and soul for us, but talent-wise he just doesn't belong. Putting his number in the rafters discredits the franchise, shows that we have no standards and is a confession of how terrible a history we've had. The unofficial retirements of 11, 28 and 37 is also ridiculous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IBatch Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 (edited) On 3/30/2024 at 5:11 AM, -AJ- said: Prime Bure in Florida was scoring almost 60 goals when no one else was even scoring 50. Bure scored 60 with the Canucks when 60 goals was almost common, especially in 1992-93. In 1999-00, he scored 58 and the next highest had 44 goals. In 2000-01, he had 59 goals and only two others hit 50 and 4th place had 45 goals. There were nine fifty goal scorers in 1993-94 and a staggering 14 in 1992-93. I maintain that Bure was at his peak during those two years in Florida. The eyes said it all, and Bure was incredible from his first to last shift. Led the league in scoring in 93-94, and if we won the cup, he'd probably of won the Smythe. Players were clutching and grabbing in full force by 93-94. It did continue and get worse in the dead puck era, it also didn't affect him much then either. Do think 98 maybe was his "peak", his peak wasn't really much different though. And agree that he was a top 20 all-time player. Probably top 4-5 as far as exciting goes. Nobody has stood up to watch anyone play when his puck was on his stick since. Because when it was on his stick, there was a chance he was going to score, even with Odjick on his wing whiffing on open net tap ins, 2-1's. Edited March 31 by IBatch 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Vanderhoek Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 (edited) On 3/29/2024 at 10:33 PM, Elias Pettersson said: You also need to include the numbers taken out of circulation. 11, 28, 37, 38. So it might only be 500 years. If I had to “unretire” numbers, then I would only keep the players that are in the Hall of Fame. That’s how Edmonton does it. Either that or you just honour that player like Toronto used to. ‘ If you keep the Hall of Fame players then you keep Bure, Sedin and Sedin. And you unretire Smyl, Linden and Naslund. I would suggest unless its a number retired by the NHL like Gretzky's then every number should remain in circulation. You hang the jersey or banner up with the player & number but you keep the numbers in circulation. You can honor the greats. Would love to see a player wearing any one of those numbers, no reason not to. Its one of those things where people keep kicking the can down the road " oh we don't need to worry about running out of numbers " etc, short sighted. Why not have a player say Lekkerimaki comes in and wants to wear number 10. Why not ? getting forced to pick a number in the 70s, 80s, 90s lol is lame. Naslund, I think he gets in because he was a captain and produced points but those other players showed so much more to me. Edited March 31 by Mike Vanderhoek 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IBatch Posted March 31 Share Posted March 31 (edited) 2 hours ago, Mike Vanderhoek said: I would suggest unless its a number retired by the NHL like Gretzky's then every number should remain in circulation. You hang the jersey or banner up with the player & number but you keep the numbers in circulation. You can honor the greats. Would love to see a player wearing any one of those numbers, no reason not to. Its one of those things where people keep kicking the can down the road " oh we don't need to worry about running out of numbers " etc, short sighted. Why not have a player say Lekkerimaki comes in and wants to wear number 10. Why not ? getting forced to pick a number in the 70s, 80s, 90s lol is lame. Naslund, I think he gets in because he was a captain and produced points but those other players showed so much more to me. Gino took 66, he liked how he played the game. There was some media pushback (apparent lack of respect) and the league called and asked him to take it back. Can see both sides. Think it should be up to the team. And also don't think this is anything we need to worry about anytime soon. Habs yes, well you'd think so. 32 teams and sure they want 40. So don't think teams will be retiring numbers in any sort of rates to be concerned. Average of one cup in 32 years and all. Two finals. On a trajectory that is likely going to add more years every decade or so. We've been around for half a century plus, and have retired 10, 12, 16, 19, 22 and 33. On a diminishing return. There are much bigger things to worry about than this. Also in the history of the league there are only a few numbers that resonate with one player. Even the Habs don't really need to worry much about it. Sure there was a time that they could have. 93. I was a young adult back then. No cup and no players aside from Roy worth retiring. Edited March 31 by IBatch Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erkayloomeh Posted April 1 Share Posted April 1 Naslund. To one dimensional and a weak captain . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coconuts Posted April 1 Share Posted April 1 Bure, followed by Naslund, Nazzy's on the cusp for me but I'd personally keep him out. If I had it my way only Smyl, Linden, and the twins would have their jerseys retired. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dumb Nuck Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 (edited) Just add a third digit and we’re good for half a millennia. Edited April 2 by Dumb Nuck Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spook007 Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 On 3/30/2024 at 3:56 AM, KesLord said: Hi all, I pondered this question with a friend and found it really challenging. Here's the setup: "in the Canucks first 50 years, they retired 6 jerseys: - Pavel Bure - Stan Smyl - Trevor Linden - Markus Naslund - Daniel Sedin - Henrik sedin We did some math and found: - Of the original 99 numbers that were available to the Canucks when they became a team, only 93 are available now. - Of the 93 remaining numbers, 20 of them need to be used on current roster players - We need to retire 75 more jersey numbers until there no longer is a number available to a player - Every 8 years and 4 months, the Canucks retire a jersey number. - If the current pattern continues, that means in 625 years the Canucks will have to 'unretire a jersey'. That is because there would be only 19 retired/unwearable jersey numbers available. So the question is this: if you were asked to 'unretire' a jersey from one of 6 Canucks listed above, which jersey number would you 'unretire' first, and why? I think they unretire A.I. "Short circuit", who they draft in 2091... They find a loophole in CBA, which allows them to draft and play an A.I. player as long as it carries human hairs, and can say "No.5s alive'"... 5 Years later the 4 Stanley Cups Canucks win with "Short Circuit" leading the league with 2045 goal scored over 5 seasons, are being rescinded in a modern version of the Luongo rule, and all the Cups are being taken of the list... A Statue raised in front of the newly names "Sci fi Arena" next to the Roger Neilson statue is being blamed, and "Short Circuits" number "98" is being unretired and taken down from the rafters.... As a penalty for playing "Short Circuit" although at first being allowed to do so, means Canucks are forced to draft 7 of Lui Erikssons descendants and play them for 7 years... Dark times over the horizon.... 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.