The NHL Discussion Thread

[Progmatic]

The Bruins luck may run out...Hawks were clearly better team though Bruins were very efficient...IMHO the game itself was not that good as it was fragmented by numerous icing and offside calls...

[Yves]

Boston needed that one more than Chicago. We'll have to see if they can rebound on Saturday after such an emotional defeat. If the series moves to Boston with Chicago having taken the first 2, I think it will be a short series, as in Hawks in 5.

[Ken]

After Chicago floundered on their 5 on 3 power play, I thought they were done for. It was an epic game, one where neither team deserved to lose. Both teams (and fans)need an extra day of rest !

[Trane]

As a diehard Canucks fan who knows this team inside and out, I respectfully disagree. As someone who grew up in the city, I can confirm the Canucks were never a very popular draw in the 1980s. The Smyl era team accomplished one cinderella run in a decade of mediocrity. One can romanticize that postseason campaign, but it was a mere blip in an era of incompetence. In fact, in the mid-1980s, the team set franchise lows in attendance. The attendance was worse than it had ever been. The 1982 run had nothing to do with the team's long-term success; while the towel-raising gesture is iconic, it did nothing for the franchise as it had no bearing on the actual on-ice results. Attendance continued to plummet after the 1981-82 season. The Canucks were rarely televised on CBC, often because the broadcaster favored the Oilers, Leafs, and Canadiens. The Canucks were a niche team for educated hockey fans in the 1970s and 1980s. Roger Neilson's towel-waving gesture is iconic, but is truly one of the only standout moments in twenty years of failure. In addition, the Canucks were swept in four games against the Islanders..

Yeah, I know that the Canucks franchise running was dismal thoughout the 70's (I more or less say so in my post)... and they'd have died in the course of the 80's if it wasn't for that post-season streak they managed (that Nilssen coach was a disaster with the Leafs before going to the Canucks)... If memory serves (from a then-Torontonian perspective), there were some periodical rumours of bankrucy during that decade

But I think some people did realize that there was some kind of possibility of hockey survival after that fluke NHL Stanley Cup final loss... And from that moment onwards, the franchise did grow a bit more in the local esteem (less VC bashing cross-Canada, as well)

But yeah, the three WHA Canadian teams quickly fared better than the Canucks did... even the Flames (dismally bad in Atlanta) quickly did better...

[Klonk]

That was an awesome game! Both teams played well enough to win, but this is a big mental blow for Boston. Not only blowing a two goal lead, but to lose in the 3rd OT is tough to get over. Boston really needs to take the next game I'd think. I'm really hoping this series goes 7 games because this is a great match-up.

[Dave (in MA)]

Hawks were clearly better team
IMHO the game itself was not that good

What game were you watching?
(I need an extra cup of coffee this morning)

[Progmatic]

What game were you watching?
(I need an extra cup of coffee this morning)

well maybe for the invested Boston guy like you there was some worthwhile suspense but for me as unbiased hockey fan I saw lot of game disruptions, icings, fundamental mistakes (e.g. too many players on ice, inability to control puck on number of occasions, defensive players out of position..etc...).

[WeatherWiseCDC]

Yeah, I know that the Canucks franchise running was dismal thoughout the 70's (I more or less say so in my post)... and they'd have died in the course of the 80's if it wasn't for that post-season streak they managed (that Nilssen coach was a disaster with the Leafs before going to the Canucks)... If memory serves (from a then-Torontonian perspective), there were some periodical rumours of bankrucy during that decade

But I think some people did realize that there was some kind of possibility of hockey survival after that fluke NHL Stanley Cup final loss... And from that moment onwards, the franchise did grow a bit more in the local esteem (less VC bashing cross-Canada, as well)

But yeah, the three WHA Canadian teams quickly fared better than the Canucks did... even the Flames (dismally bad in Atlanta) quickly did better...

I certainly think the run to the Finals aided the team's reputation nationwide, especially in other hockey circles. I'm not sure if you're suggesting Roger Neilson was a bad coach -- he wasn't. He was quite the innovator, in fact, inventing video coaching. He's a member of the Hockey Hall of Fame and has the Order of Canada. That said, he was booed out of Toronto, and the paper bag story is quite infamous there. Being a former-Torontonian, you should know about that.

The 1970s and 1980s were not kind to the Canucks. The 1982 run gave them a bit of life, but that was short-lived. The Pacific Coliseum seat capacity was 16,413 in the late 70s and early 80s. In 1981-82, the attendance was lower than it had ever been, averaging 12,858 per game. In 1984-85, that dropped to 11,147. The following two seasons, the attendance dropped another thousand, bottoming out at a record-low 10,406 seats sold per game.

In the early 1990s, the attendance surged back up to the 15,000+ range. In addition, the long-time owners, the Griffiths, were experiencing the height of their success with the team. It was a truly incredible era for the team -- the first truly classic period for the team. Popularity soared and everything was well in the early 1990s aside from the passing of Frank Griffiths just days before the 1994 Stanley Cup playoffs began. It was euphoric, and the team gained a sense of importance to the entire province of BC. As the article suggests, this was when people began to idolize the Canucks and particularly Pavel Bure. The long-term implications of that era helped to save the team and to show the hockey world that Canucks could be successful. In fact, Bure is still the greatest Vancouver Canuck of all time and the only member of the Hockey Hall of Fame to be inducted as a Canuck. The era produced many fan favorites as well, including Bure, Linden, McLean, Greg Adams, Cliff Ronning, Geoff Courtnall, Gino Odjick, Dave Babych, etc, etc.

All four of the Canucks' retired (or soon-to-be retired) numbers were worn by those who donned the 1990s uniforms at some point.







After a long estrangement from Canucks management, Pavel and the team have reconciled and he'll have his jersey retired next season:



Hopefully you didn't miss out on the Canucks in the 90s.



The era produced some of the most iconic images and play-by-play calls in team history.



Some of the most dramatic moments in Finals history as well:



Had Bure scored here, the Canucks would have been up 3-1 in the game, cementing a probable Game 4 victory. With the Canucks' momentum, they might have won the series had they scored there.

In addition, in Game 7 they hit the post down 3-2. Had they tied the game, anything could have happened in overtime. That team's legacy and mythology are, in many fans' eyes, the very height of the franchise's success (the 2011 team isn't even close to being as revered as that 1994 team). They've never been closer to winning the Stanley Cup than that.

[WeatherWiseCDC]

By the way, the game yesterday was a thrill to watch. The Bruins had so many chances to end it and could not. Both teams had excellent opportunities, but the hockey gods placed an invisible wall in Crawford's crease. It almost seemed like a game they were destined to win. The intensity of the overtime periods and those glorious scoring opportunities made last night's game a truly captivating experience.

I have some degree of respect for the Hawks. I dislike the Bruins and particularly their aggressive, bully mentality. It was an excellent match despite its choppiness and lack of flow. The scoring chances more than made up for it.

[Ken]

FYI, a quick check of Blackhawks ticket for tonight........ the cheapest ticket, standing room only, in upper level..... $ 298 !!! My 46-inch HD will suffice.

[Klonk]

wise decision! Lookin' forward to the game tonight. Hope it's as good as the last. I want 7 games!

Meanwhile looks like Vigneault is the new Ranger head coach. I like it.

[Ken]

And I heard on the radio that Tort's is interviwing for the Vancouver position ??

[Scott Bails]

FYI, a quick check of Blackhawks ticket for tonight........ the cheapest ticket, standing room only, in upper level..... $ 298 !!! My 46-inch HD will suffice.

Bernie Parent was on the radio the other day, and was saying a fan recently came up to him with a ticket from the '75 Stanley Cup Finals, asking him to sign it.


Ticket price was $9.75

[WeatherWiseCDC]

wise decision! Lookin' forward to the game tonight. Hope it's as good as the last. I want 7 games!

Meanwhile looks like Vigneault is the new Ranger head coach. I like it.

Yikes. Good luck!

http://www.progressiveears.org/forum...l=1#post109100

As a Canucks fan, I think it would be a mistake if the Rangers hired Vigneault.

Vigneault is an introverted version of John Tortorella. Canucks fans are all too familiar with him. He dislikes players who struggle defensively, demonstrates favoritism towards certain players, and will play a defensive style when allowed to. This year and in his first few years, he was known to implement a defensive system, which many fans jokingly dubbed "defending the tie." He has also thrown several players under the bus and publicly criticized them before even speaking with said players. He has suggested that such players as Ryan Kesler and Cody Hodgson were not as worn down from injury as they appeared to be upon returning, and has demoted and benched several players in the past without good reason. He also does not trust rookies; Michael Grabner, Sergei Shirokov, and Jordan Schroeder were all given limited minutes, and each struggled predictably.

In addition, he refuses to use his timeouts in appropriate scenarios, and if he only has one star goaltender, he will refuse to start the backup. There were many nights prior to Cory Schneider's arrival when Roberto Luongo would be left in goal for several goals against despite obviously being unfocused.

You aren't going to see anything different on the ice from Vigneault than you saw with Tortorella, and you may in fact see worse results. Once he designs a strategy, he does not deviate from it when necessary. The drop pass, for example, was exploited by the LA Kings last year because that was our only entry maneuver. Every year, he is outcoached by the opposition.

The only difference is he doesn't antagonize the media. If Rangers fans wish to follow a different direction, they should look elsewhere.

I really don't want Tortorella to be the Canucks' head coach. I want an offensively-minded coach who can adapt to situations and utilize his star players.

[Scott Bails]

Cool! Sounds like a great fit for the Rangers!

[Obscured]

Lookin' forward to the game tonight. Hope it's as good as the last.

Yep. Just a little shorter!

[Klonk]

[QUOTE=WeatherWiseCDC;114460]Yikes. Good luck!

http://www.progressiveears.org/forum...l=1#post109100


Interesting. Most Vancouver fans I know have actually had mostly positive things to say of AV. I don't know much about him other than he had a good record during his tenure out there. The one consistent with their comments however is more offense so we shall see! Every team plays defense first these day so I can handle that. I just got so bored of Torts collapsing in front of Henrik, blocking shots strategy. Change is good.

[Klonk]

Cool! Sounds like a great fit for the Rangers!

Philly has made great strides too. Mark Streit's power play goals may just make up for some of the goals against he'll be responsible for.

[walt]

Was Messier ever considered(seriously) for Rangers coach?.

[Klonk]

Apparently he really wanted the job, Walt. I'm glad it didn't happen. Love the guy and what he did for us in the mid 90's, but that ship has sailed. Not to mention he has zero NHL coaching experience.

[Dave (in MA)]

Ho-hum, a game that ended in regulation.
[IMG}http://cdn.bleacherreport.net/images/team_logos/24x24/boston_bruins.png[/IMG]

[Dave (in MA)]

Ho-hum, a game that ended in regulation.
boston_bruins.png

[ForeverAutumn]

Wow. Another game goes into OT. This is a well matched series...and one hell of a Game 4!

[Obscured]

Ho-hum, a game that ended in regulation.
boston_bruins.png

Little anomaly that seems to have been righted. Wild one tonight, can't wait for period 4 to start. I think this one ends fast; first 3 minutes.

[Scott Bails]

Philly has made great strides too. Mark Streit's power play goals may just make up for some of the goals against he'll be responsible for.

Ugh...another Paul Holmgren gem. FOUR years, Homer?!!!



HELLUVA game tonight!