Kesler doesn't wanna hear that the Nucks are declining

[Cole436]

Originally Posted by stemit14

They also did all of that and made it through the playoffs by becoming the biggest divers in NHL history. I don't think there has ever been a team with such a reputation for whining and diving as that team. It got so bad in 2011 that it became the story of their cup run... Analysts, sports writers, and sports radio talk shows weren't talking about gritty plays or amazing goals like they do in every other teams playoff run... Instead, they were talking about the sedins taking punches to the face and whining to the refs, Kesler chicken-winging Shea Weber's stick to draw the power play that won them that series, burrows biting people, and luongo flopping around to draw penalties. Do u guys remember the montages of the Canucks diving displays from that season that were showing up on sportscentre? They're on YouTube still if u want to see them again.

That is why they don't deserve to be called elite... Because they disgraced the game in a way that is still being felt 3 years later. I know some of you will say that "every team dives" but nobody ever did it so much as the Canucks did. Because of that success in 2011, diving gets worse every year around the league and nothing has been done about it.

They never were elite and I'm going to enjoy watching their fall from grace.

You won't find a person who trashes that team as often as I do for their antics. They were a flat out unlikable, cheating bunch of diving losers. But no matter how much I despised them, and cheered against them, it doesn't negate how good that team was; they were elite in every aspect of the game.

It just happened to be that they were a bunch of diving, whining biters.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by shogged

torts and the 25% rule haha

We need a damn occasional save!

Priceless! I cant wait to hear V.2.0

[sun]

They were a very good team, but how can you call a team Elite if they don't have a cup to show for it?

President's Trophy is often won by the best team in the weakest division. If you only win one game in the playoffs after winning the pres trophy, were you really the best team in the league?

[19Yzerman19]

Someone made the comment of "weak division" after they won the 2nd president's trophy and some mathematically inclined Vancouver fan published an article pro-rating the Canucks' record against opponents outside the NW division. They found that if the Canucks had only played outside the NW, they would still have won the first president's trophy and would have fallen short in season 2 by one point. That doesn't take into account that the non-NW games often involved long road trips through multiple time zones, which is probably worth a couple of points in the standings. Basically, the "weak division" argument doesn't hold up very well.

The best team in the league doesn't win the cup every year. It takes a great team, plus a lot of luck, plus (most importantly) everyone staying healthy, to win the Cup. Somewhere between one and four samples of somewhere between four and seven games is not a big enough sample size to determine the quality of a team. The playoffs and the Cup are more important than the regular season, obviously, but that's only because we - the NHL, the players, the fans, everyone in hockey - have decided that it should be. So all these arguments basing what makes a good hockey team on playoff success are kind of misguided.

[stemit14]

Originally Posted by Cole436

You won't find a person who trashes that team as often as I do for their antics. They were a flat out unlikable, cheating bunch of diving losers. But no matter how much I despised them, and cheered against them, it doesn't negate how good that team was; they were elite in every aspect of the game.

It just happened to be that they were a bunch of diving, whining biters.

The Canucks scored more goals on the powerplay that season than anyone else... Considering how many of those powerplays were drawn from dives, i can't respect their record that season. They were an average team 5 on 5 who relied on their powerplays. If u take away their powerplays that were drawn from diving... Like in the SCF where the refs stopped calling it... You realized how average the team was.

[Oil Stain]

Originally Posted by stemit14

They were an average team 5 on 5 who relied on their powerplays.

Canucks were 2nd in the league in even strength goals for/against that season........

Some of the arguments made to discredit the Canucks are beyond reason. They were a powerhouse for a couple of seasons. Deal with it.

[Poe969]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

Canucks were 2nd in the league in even strength goals for/against that season........

Some of the arguments made to discredit the Canucks are beyond reason. They were a powerhouse during the regular season for a couple of seasons. Deal with it.

fyp.

Because we all hate the nucks, we're just enjoying their "fall from grace" more than just about any other team. Deal with it.

[dirk diggler]

Originally Posted by stemit14

The Canucks scored more goals on the powerplay that season than anyone else... Considering how many of those powerplays were drawn from dives, i can't respect their record that season. They were an average team 5 on 5 who relied on their powerplays. If u take away their powerplays that were drawn from diving... Like in the SCF where the refs stopped calling it... You realized how average the team was.

the Canucks are what are referred to as a "paper champion". on paper they had a lot of the pieces but the diving and whining kept them from the big prize. the Sedins are still fine players but they arent close to what they were 3 years ago. Kesler when healthy is a good player but not even close to as good as Canuck fans think he is ("the new Messier")...

[Jason14h]

the Canucks are what are referred to as a "paper champion". on paper they had a lot of the pieces but the diving and whining kept them from the big prize.

They made it to game 7 of the Stanley Cup Finals....

Let's not pretend they had no post season success.

[dirk diggler]

Originally Posted by Jason14h

They made it to game 7 of the Stanley Cup Finals....

Let's not pretend they had no post season success.

edmonton went to game 7 in 2006, i guess they were elite?

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by dirk diggler

edmonton went to game 7 in 2006, i guess they were elite?

Come on. The Canucks were the best team in the regular season and then went on to win 15 playoff games. Big difference from the Oilers who squeaked in at 8 and rode Pronger and a hot goalie to game 7 then went on to miss the playoffs for 7 years

The Canucks won the division 7 of the last 9 years. 3 1st round exits, 3 2nd round exits and a finals loss. They have been a very good team for a decade and were elite for at least 2 of those years

[SuperMatt18]

2007 Anaheim Ducks
2008 Detroit Red Wings
2009 Pittsburgh Penguins
2010 Chicago Blackhawks
2011 Boston Bruins
2012 Los Angeles Kings
2013 Chicago Blackhawks

Those are your elite teams of the last decade. Elite teams win Cups, good teams win games.

The Canucks while good, were only truly great in one season (2011). Then the playoff debacles the following two seasons prevented them from ever taking the step to being truly elite.

If you say the Canucks are elite, then you would also have to build a similar argument for the Ottawa Senators, San Jose Sharks, Washington Capitals, and Buffalo Sabres as elite. All have had decent playoff runs, Conference titles, and no cups since the lockout.

[Inglewood Jack]

the SC winners since 2008 I think everyone can agree were elite because they were way up in the standings both before and after their championships. but if we're looking at the last decade, you'd have to include NJ (03), TB (04) and Carolina (06) for the analysis as well.

The Devils I can see as being elite up to that point since they were a consistently excellent team since the mid-90's. but TB, Carolina and Anaheim kind of appeared suddenly, won a cup, then fell off the face of the earth soon after. this topic of elite is stupidly subjective, and yes winning a cup is probably the one biggest factor, but I think these 3 teams are evidence that it's not the only factor.

[Enoch Root]

The Nucks were a great team the year they went to the finals, no question about it.

For me though, an elite team is a team that can show greatness consistently, that can keep themselves at the top and relevant over a number of years and through personnel changes. An elite team is one where, when new guys come in, they become better players and the team keeps rolling along.

The Red Wings are the classic example. With their 2nd cup in 5 years, the Hawks have entered that realm. Pittsburg and Boston are in the discussion for cup favourites every year.

The Nucks had it all come together for one great year. They have been among the best teams in the regular season for a few years.

But very little in the way of playoff success. And an inability to MAINTAIN their status, to me, says they are not really an elite team.

I also believe that the Nucks did a good job of recognizing how the game would change after the 05 lockout. They adjusted quicker than most teams and exploited their advantage with a good PP. However, the rest of the league caught up. That advantage is gone. And as a result, the Nucks have quickly slipped back into the pack.

Nothing about that says elite team the way I define elite.

[T@T]

Preseason but I thought they looked very slow last night.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

2007 Anaheim Ducks
2008 Detroit Red Wings
2009 Pittsburgh Penguins
2010 Chicago Blackhawks
2011 Boston Bruins
2012 Los Angeles Kings
2013 Chicago Blackhawks

Those are your elite teams of the last decade. Elite teams win Cups, good teams win games.

The Canucks while good, were only truly great in one season (2011). Then the playoff debacles the following two seasons prevented them from ever taking the step to being truly elite.

If you say the Canucks are elite, then you would also have to build a similar argument for the Ottawa Senators, San Jose Sharks, Washington Capitals, and Buffalo Sabres as elite. All have had decent playoff runs, Conference titles, and no cups since the lockout.

I would say those teams are elite. I do not agree that winning the cup is the minimum requirement to be an elite team. To me the elite teams are the ones who are consistently at the top of the league and considered by many to be tre cup contenders. The Pens have only won 1 cup in the Crosby era and have not made the finals since then but they have been elite for 6 years IMO. Vancouver was an elite team for much of the past 5 years but the roster has aged and has been managed poorly from a prospect/development perspective that they are no longer a top contender. Some may call them a bubble team but for now I think they are a 4-6 seed in the west and a 1st/2nd round playoff team and no longer elite/contender

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

2007 Anaheim Ducks
2008 Detroit Red Wings
2009 Pittsburgh Penguins
2010 Chicago Blackhawks
2011 Boston Bruins
2012 Los Angeles Kings
2013 Chicago Blackhawks

Those are your elite teams of the last decade. Elite teams win Cups, good teams win games.

The Canucks while good, were only truly great in one season (2011). Then the playoff debacles the following two seasons prevented them from ever taking the step to being truly elite.

If you say the Canucks are elite, then you would also have to build a similar argument for the Ottawa Senators, San Jose Sharks, Washington Capitals, and Buffalo Sabres as elite. All have had decent playoff runs, Conference titles, and no cups since the lockout.

The Flames of the late 80s would have merited the designation of elite team even if they hadn't won the Cup in 89. I disagree you need to win a Cup to be elite. By those standards, there is only one elite team in the NHL in a given year, and the Pens have not been elite for the last four years. Which is nonsense.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

2007 Anaheim Ducks
2008 Detroit Red Wings
2009 Pittsburgh Penguins
2010 Chicago Blackhawks
2011 Boston Bruins
2012 Los Angeles Kings
2013 Chicago Blackhawks

Those are your elite teams of the last decade. Elite teams win Cups, good teams win games.

The Canucks while good, were only truly great in one season (2011). Then the playoff debacles the following two seasons prevented them from ever taking the step to being truly elite.

If you say the Canucks are elite, then you would also have to build a similar argument for the Ottawa Senators, San Jose Sharks, Washington Capitals, and Buffalo Sabres as elite. All have had decent playoff runs, Conference titles, and no cups since the lockout.

Those were definitely the elite teams from May-June each year...while one can argue that's all that matters, had the Kings lost a few more points from Oct-April, they are nowhere near the list.

It all comes down to the timespan we are talking about, and definition of "elite" (to me it is the very top echelon of teams - generally 2-4 of them in the league).

If we are talking 2010-2012, then you'd have to be blind to dispute the Nucks in that group.

If it is since the lockout, it's a different story...for one thing, it isn't the 60s, 70s or 80s anymore...It's hard to say that any teams are truly elite for more than a 1-3 year span.

Chicago has won two cups, but they only started making the playoffs in 2009...
Penguins were in the basement until 2008. There is only 1 team at the top of the list since the lockout (Red Wings), but I don't think elite is an appropriate adjective for that wide a time span. The Penguins, Blackhawks, Canucks, Bruins, Capitals, Sharks and Flyers are all similar over that period, with varying peaks and valleys.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

The Flames of the late 80s would have merited the designation of elite team even if they hadn't won the Cup in 89. I disagree you need to win a Cup to be elite. By those standards, there is only one elite team in the NHL in a given year, and the Pens have not been elite for the last four years. Which is nonsense.

I agree. A team doesnt need to win the cup to be considered elite, but to be a perpetual contender.

I would consider the Canucks to have been Elite over the past few seasons, but they're definitely on the decline now.

[Mean Mr. Mustard]

This is what I really like about this website, it is a good conversation, with some mild jabs being thrown, but with some very good observations and discussion. Most message boards get dulled down in the childish antics with threads like this, but this one has been fabulous!