Luc Bourdon

[JustinW]

I think he would have helped tremendously during the 2011 run. We would have probably not needed to trade for Keith Ballard either.

 

[hellstick]

The way Bourdon was developing and being usurped by Edler on our depth chart was definitely concerning. That said, I always maintained that Bourdon had all the tools to be a top 4 defender.

His passing was tragic. For a few seasons after his death, I always created a Luc Bourdon player in the NHL videogames.

 

[John Belushi]

Drafting Bourdon one of many attempts Vancouver made to replace Ed Jovanovski. Doubtful the Canucks go for a guy like Keith Ballard in FA if Bourdon was still in the fold.

Luc was prone to defensive gaffes, and lacked offensive vision (unlike Jovo) but he was capable of developing into a 25-30 pt guy with some physicality and bite to his play.

2011 may have gone quite differently with him in the lineup, for better, or for worse. A couple extra bad giveaways in the Chicago series and it could've been a first round exit for the Canucks.

 

[vanuck]

Ballard was brought in as a top 4 defender but only ended up on the bottom pair because we signed Hamhuis afterwards, so our D-corps that year might very well have ended up looking like:

Edler-Ehrhoff
Ballard-Bieksa
Bourdon-Salo

 

[lawrence]

I imagine him being a much more rounded version of Denis Gauthier.

Luc Bourdon's attributes was his skating, quickness and his ability to deliver clean and deadly hits. He was 6'2 210 Lb, so he had size mobility.

But who knows..... he did have a tendancy to turn the puck over... but cmon.... the kid was was 20 years old. Look at Bieksa. He was turning pucks over inside out from 2008 to 2010, until Hamhius came and stabilized his game.

I believe Bourdon would have been a critical part of the Canucks drive, with him, I believe there would probably be No Balland and we have Bourdon delivering deadly hits agains the Bruins for us.

I imagine Bourdon would have earned a salary similar to Alex Edlers, and a important member of our top 4.

 

[Intoewsables]

It feels a little wrong talking about him like this, but I never really saw him as someone who was going to put it all together and become a top-4 defenseman. I agree with a couple posters in here who said that even with his flashy tools, he didn't really seem to have the hockey IQ to keep up. Just seems weird to me to be penciling him into lineups and assuming that he would've been great.

Regardless, his death was incredibly tragic and I hope I'm not coming off as insensitive here.

 

[canucksfan]

He had a fantastic shot from the point. I remember him trying the 2007 WJC game against the US. He did have the physical tools. However, he lacked the hockey IQ. I very much doubt he makes it as a top 4 dman.

I don't see how people are saying top 2 d man because he was never that good.

 

[me2]

Benning would have traded him for a 3rd.

 

[Reverend Mayhem]

Ballard was brought in as a top 4 defender but only ended up on the bottom pair because we signed Hamhuis afterwards, so our D-corps that year might very well have ended up looking like:

Edler-Ehrhoff
Ballard-Bieksa
Bourdon-Salo

We still have Bourdon in 2010, we don't need Ballard and probably just hope that Hammer signs with us and take a gamble.

 

[vanuck]

We still have Bourdon in 2010, we don't need Ballard and probably just hope that Hammer signs with us and take a gamble.

The rationale for acquiring Ballard and then Hamhuis was that we'd had enough of our D always getting injured at critical times and needing guys like Rome, O'Brien and Alberts to play in the top 4. So it's hard to say. If you think Bourdon would still have been a 3rd pairing guy in 2010 MG likely would have gone ahead with the trade anyway, so in the alternate universe where Luc never passed away I think we were still getting Ballard no matter what happened due to the sequence of events (draft day, then free agency).