But there are a bunch of teams with way worse D then that. Hell look at edmonton, Bieksa would be a top 2 for them.
- Pres.cup

THERE IT IS!!!

The silver lining!

No cup has always been from secondary scoring and a lack of depth at C. The one year we had 4 quality C's one went and got his eye destroyed.......then we had 3. We also lost our top Dman in the finals, and our 2C became largely ineffective due to injury.

We lost in game 7 of the finals.....

Pretty hard to pin that on Bieksa.
- golfingsince

We were ripping on the wrong guys for that SCF all these years

So we need elite players in our top 4 and top 6 to win a cup. Seems easy enough. Bieksa was just as valuable as Oduya, if not more so when you compare their prime years. Especially for his cap hit back then.

This discussion is ridiculous man.
- Nucker101

All discussion on here is ridiculous.....

All discussion on here is ridiculous.....
- belcherbd

This is up there with the Sbisa supporters...almost.

McQuaid better than Bieksa in his prime?

Martinez better than Bieksa in his prime?


Jesus. Is this Jon Weisbrod's HB account?
- Nucker101

Oh... So strictly bottom 4?

McQuaid Yes... Better than Juice. And has a cup.

Martinez? No. But 2 cups nonetheless!

All discussion on here is ridiculous.....
- belcherbd

Exactly!

What I learned today: Bieksa held us back from winning a cup.
- Nucker101

Also some chick pees out of a plastic Richard

What I learned today: Bieksa held us back from winning a cup.
- Nucker101

Also some chick pees out of a plastic Richard

We were ripping on the wrong guys for that SCF all these years
- Nucker101

It's (frank)ing ridiculous. That was a pretty dominant team when healthy. As much as I admire AV for the coaching job he can do I was pissed when he didn't change his lines against the Blackhawks for game 5. I always said to put Burrows with Kesler at that point, it only took him 3 games to figure it out. That may have saved some wear and tear.

Losing Manny was the biggest issue however. That made Kes take way too high of a defensive zone face-off %. GMMG actually made some brilliant moves that year........it's too bad they're overshadowed by what happened afterwards. There would be a bronze statue of him had game 7 gone differently.

All discussion on here is ridiculous.....
- belcherbd

He had good years. He was never a top 2 Dman . He was a 3/4 . He always had th teams best interest. It is just time to move on. We as fans have trouble saying bye to our aging players

No cup has always been from secondary scoring and a lack of depth at C. The one year we had 4 quality C's one went and got his eye destroyed.......then we had 3. We also lost our top Dman in the finals, and our 2C became largely ineffective due to injury.

We lost in game 7 of the finals.....

Pretty hard to pin that on Bieksa.
- golfingsince

Look he gave us his soul and on most nights his all.

It's a long season and many players have that Casual Kev moment. Forgiveable.

Not pinning the loss on him.

All Lou had to do was have one good game in Boston.

Bieksa's decline was fairly sharp after than 11' run. I would have looked at moving him at the Kings dominated them. It was obvious it was time to rebuild.

The point is and some are missing it is this-- Old Kev is long gone. No point in saying if we only had him now. Time to move on.

Hey Rugnit !

If you're coaching and involved in a locker room you're most likely to cut a bit more slack to the guy who's chucking knuckles out there defending his teammates as well.

The guy was legit top 4..... to the point where he was probably our most sought after Dman.

He had good years. He was never a top 2 Dman . He was a 3/4 . He always had th teams best interest. It is just time to move on. We as fans have trouble saying bye to our aging players
- VANTEL

This.

It's the hanging on to long and not moving players when they are worth more.

This fanbase loves it's players more than the team.

Hard to build a winner like that.

Touchy crowd..
- Nucker101

Get knocked out three times and then call me touchy. Not a single child of mine will ever play hockey.

Not after what iv'e been through. not a chance.

Getting your head smashed really alters your thoughts on whats important. Its scary shyt man.

Look he gave us his soul and on most nights his all.

It's a long season and many players have that Casual Kev moment. Forgiveable.

Not pinning the loss on him.

All Lou had to do was have one good game in Boston.

Bieksa's decline was fairly sharp after than 11' run. I would have looked at moving him at the Kings dominated them. It was obvious it was time to rebuild.

The point is and some are missing it is this-- Old Kev is long gone. No point in saying if we only had him now. Time to move on.
- rugdnit

I don't think anybody cares that Bieksa is gone, but he also had full right not to waive his NTC until all of the writing was on the wall.

We scored 8 goals in 7 games, Lu had 2 shutout victories in 3 wins. Was he outplayed? I'd say for sure but that's one of the best performances in the SCF........ever.

We lacked scoring depth, D depth and for sure C depth.

For everything that people bemoan that team lacked......more than anything they lacked health.

It was a very well put together team that missed the ultimate goal by one game. The difference between how we view that team and the '94 team is that we all expected them to win the cup, whereas '94 was more of a miracle run.


As I said a month or so ago, we should savour the positives of what a fun season that was rather than have such disdain for a game 7 loss.

It's (frank)ing ridiculous. That was a pretty dominant team when healthy. As much as I admire AV for the coaching job he can do I was pissed when he didn't change his lines against the Blackhawks for game 5. I always said to put Burrows with Kesler at that point, it only took him 3 games to figure it out. That may have saved some wear and tear.

Losing Manny was the biggest issue however. That made Kes take way too high of a defensive zone face-off %. GMMG actually made some brilliant moves that year........it's too bad they're overshadowed by what happened afterwards. There would be a bronze statue of him had game 7 gone differently.
- golfingsince

I think the problem is with us fans and others who consider that team as losers just because they didn't win...,
Team was entertaining and absolutely dominant but because they lost in a seven game series in game seven, they are losers and the team needed to be remade in the image of the bruins.

Obviously winning the cup is the goal but at the end of the day my name isn't on the cup. As long as the hockey is entertaining and the team isn't full bumholes like messier or lucic, I'm happy.

Hey Rugnit !

If you're coaching and involved in a locker room you're most likely to cut a bit more slack to the guy who's chucking knuckles out there defending his teammates as well.

The guy was legit top 4..... to the point where he was probably our most sought after Dman.
- golfingsince

I don't disagree.

They rode that pony too long and here we are.

At some point you have to look at trading any player in that critical window where his value is high and just before the skills/body are in decline.

Get knocked out three times and then call me touchy. Not a single child of mine will ever play hockey.

Not after what iv'e been through. not a chance.

Getting your head smashed really alters your thoughts on whats important. Its scary shyt man.
- vancity787

I got knocked out about a dozen times fighting my brother. I don't blame you for not putting your kids in hockey, football ETC. However, there's a whole bunch of poop that can go wrong in life and team sports do something to build character IMO.

I don't disagree.

They rode that pony too long and here we are.

At some point you have to look at trading any player in that critical window where his value is high and just before the skills/body are in decline.
- rugdnit

I agree with that, just maybe Kev didn't.

The guy had an NTC that he negotiated in good faith. He loved the Canucks and moved on once he realized it was over.

I don't think anybody cares that Bieksa is gone, but he also had full right not to waive his NTC until all of the writing was on the wall.

We scored 8 goals in 7 games, Lu had 2 shutout victories in 3 wins. Was he outplayed? I'd say for sure but that's one of the best performances in the SCF........ever.

We lacked scoring depth, D depth and for sure C depth.

For everything that people bemoan that team lacked......more than anything they lacked health.

It was a very well put together team that missed the ultimate goal by one game. The difference between how we view that team and the '94 team is that we all expected them to win the cup, whereas '94 was more of a miracle run.


As I said a month or so ago, we should savour the positives of what a fun season that was rather than have such disdain for a game 7 loss.
- golfingsince

There is no question. We all know this. Why are we all reliving this again?

It was a great season, but losing like that and to the Bruins who think they are the protectors of all things holy was just brutal.

Many saw it as just payback for many of Kesler and Burrows actions. Can't blame them. They made their bed... And they paid for it.

The problem as well all know is how MGT reacted after 11'.

Bad contracts, Bad Hires, Just all around bad and in denial.

After the Kings rolled them in '12 it was time to refresh the core.

Not fire the coach. But what the hell... That stubborn frenchy wouldn't work with kids anyways.

I think the problem is with us fans and others who consider that team as losers just because they didn't win...,
Team was entertaining and absolutely dominant but because they lost in a seven game series in game seven, they are losers and the team needed to be remade in the image of the bruins.

Obviously winning the cup is the goal but at the end of the day my name isn't on the cup. As long as the hockey is entertaining and the team isn't full bumholes like messier or lucic, I'm happy.
- belcherbd

I thoroughly enjoyed watching that team. IMO, that loss was the beginning of the end for GMMG. He tried to change the style of the team to mirror the team he had lost to, instead of following his own plan. ( which much more resembled the Hawks)

Anyways, living in the past won't get us anywhere.

Here's to the future!!

I agree with that, just maybe Kev didn't.

The guy had an NTC that he negotiated in good faith. He loved the Canucks and moved on once he realized it was over.
- golfingsince

Absolutely.

Players have a very hard time with accepting decline and when it's time to move on.

At least it was a Martin Broduer situation.

I thoroughly enjoyed watching that team. IMO, that loss was the beginning of the end for GMMG. He tried to change the style of the team to mirror the team he had lost to, instead of following his own plan. ( which much more resembled the Hawks)

Anyways, living in the past won't get us anywhere.

Here's to the future!!
- golfingsince

Chhers

I thoroughly enjoyed watching that team. IMO, that loss was the beginning of the end for GMMG. He tried to change the style of the team to mirror the team he had lost to, instead of following his own plan. ( which much more resembled the Hawks)

Anyways, living in the past won't get us anywhere.

Here's to the future!!
- golfingsince

YES... This. It was Gillis and his reaction to the loss.

And Yes! Moving on! Looking forward to it!

Well... That was way more fun, civil and entertaining than nonuts.

Thanx guys.

Goodnight!

Cheers!