Top Ten Canucks Defensemen: #1

[Lonny Bohonos]

If Ohlund is seriously the best defenseman we've put on the ice over the last 42 years, I think we found the reason why we don't have a cup yet.

Canuck fandom has been 42 years of hope when it comes to dmen.

Lots of hype came with ohlund. Then you had the contract dispute and the injury. Always wonder how things would have played out without those two things.

 

[Barney Gumble]

If Ohlund is seriously the best defenseman we've put on the ice over the last 42 years, I think we found the reason why we don't have a cup yet.

He was one of the premier shut-down D in the league (pre-lockout). Certainly no worse than the "#1 guy" for the Canes in their Cup victory. His problem was in his prime years, he was about the only guy that could actually play *defense* on the blueline. Sure as heck was the type of defenseman we sorely lacked against the Bruins in that Cup Final series.

 

[n00bxQb]

He was one of the premier shut-down D in the league (pre-lockout). Certainly no worse than the "#1 guy" for the Canes in their Cup victory. His problem was in his prime years, he was about the only guy that could actually play *defense* on the blueline. Sure as heck was the type of defenseman we sorely lacked against the Bruins in that Cup Final series.

Don't get me wrong, he was solid in his prime, but who here can honestly say that Ohlund has a shot at the hall of fame or even having his jersey retired? Also, let's face it, Crow wasn't exactly stressing D in the WCE days.

I didn't really become a Canucks fan until Grade 3, so I guess that was '92, but I would've figured we had had better dmen than what I've seen over the last couple of decades.

 

[Tobi Wan Kenobi]

He was one of the premier shut-down D in the league (pre-lockout). Certainly no worse than the "#1 guy" for the Canes in their Cup victory. His problem was in his prime years, he was about the only guy that could actually play *defense* on the blueline. Sure as heck was the type of defenseman we sorely lacked against the Bruins in that Cup Final series.

We lacked Hamhuis in the finals....

 

[Barney Gumble]

We lacked Hamhuis in the finals....

We also needed more than Bieksa on the blueline (a guy with a nasty streak); as other teams had way too an easy time playing in our own zone.

 

[monster_bertuzzi]

Lol no.

Reinhart did his 67 points with zero support. Erhoff had 2 100 point players. Not to mention a strong supportimg cast.

lol yes!!!!

In Reinhart's best season as a Canuck his 57 points was good for 15th among defenceman in the NHL. Ehrhoff's 50 in 2011 was 7th best in the league - considering the similar styles I don't see how they aren't comparable Canucks.

Obviously just as players, Reinhart blows Ehrhoff out of the water.

 

[Shareefruck]

Don't get me wrong, he was solid in his prime, but who here can honestly say that Ohlund has a shot at the hall of fame or even having his jersey retired? Also, let's face it, Crow wasn't exactly stressing D in the WCE days.

I didn't really become a Canucks fan until Grade 3, so I guess that was '92, but I would've figured we had had better dmen than what I've seen over the last couple of decades.

Things didn't work out perfectly, but if he never got that injury and remained the same Ohlund, he absolutely would have deserved to get his jersey retired, IMO.

 

[Lonny Bohonos]

lol yes!!!!

In Reinhart's best season as a Canuck his 57 points was good for 15th among defenceman in the NHL. Ehrhoff's 50 in 2011 was 7th best in the league - considering the similar styles I don't see how they aren't comparable Canucks.

Obviously just as players, Reinhart blows Ehrhoff out of the water.

lol double no with SSBB!!!!

Not sure what your point is since it provides zero context.

Ehrhoffs 2 seasons were with players in their prime and at the top of the league.

Reinhart was stuck playing with dismal players or players who had yet to hit their primes (rookies like Linden).

Reinhart led the nucks in points in 89-90, thats how bad the team was. Next in line was Linden at 51pts, Greg Adams at 50, Skriko and Brian Bradley at 48.

In 88-89 Reinhart was 3rd with 57 points. Behind Skriko at 66 and Linden at 59. He played 10 less games than Skriko and 16 less games than Linden.


Not to mention that even in the "goal rich" 80s the teams Reinhart was on scored even less that the teams that Ehrhoff was on:

Canucks GF GA
88-89 251 253
89-90 245 306

09-10 272 222
10-11 262 185


Reinhart unfortunately was coming to the end of his career with injuries taking a toll on him. Which makes his feat that much more amazing.

Bad back, ****** team, missed games and he still managed:


88-89 57 pts in 64 games = 0.891 PPG
89-90 57 pts in 67 games = 0.851 PPG



And no Reinhart and Ehrhoff were not similar in style either. Ehrhoff is much more of a north-south guy relying on the likes of the Sedins to make the plays.

Reinhart was able to run the game himself. He was the definition of a point man QB. He was even in the face of serious injury problems consistent throughout his career. Which is why he is #6 on the all time PPG for dmen. As well his playoffs stats remained as consistent as his regular seasons stats.

Both played 2 seasons with the nucks. The only thing Ehrhoff has going for him over Reinhart is:

1) played on one of the best if not the best canuck teams ever.

2) recent memory (or no memory for those who did not get to see Reinhart).

 

[Hammer Time]

If Ohlund is seriously the best defenseman we've put on the ice over the last 42 years, I think we found the reason why we don't have a cup yet.

Get this: the Vancouver Canucks have iced a grand total of one Hall of Famer in their 42 year history. And before this year, that number was zero.

Just goes to show how horrible this team was for many years.

 

[y2kcanucks]

He was one of the premier shut-down D in the league (pre-lockout). Certainly no worse than the "#1 guy" for the Canes in their Cup victory. His problem was in his prime years, he was about the only guy that could actually play *defense* on the blueline. Sure as heck was the type of defenseman we sorely lacked against the Bruins in that Cup Final series.

Bryan Marchment was the type of defenseman we lacked in the Bruins series.

 

[TacitEndorsement]

Get this: the Vancouver Canucks have iced a grand total of one Hall of Famer in their 42 year history. And before this year, that number was zero.

Just goes to show how horrible this team was for many years.

Three Hall of Famer's.

 

[Lonny Bohonos]

Three Hall of Famer's.

DP..

 

[Lonny Bohonos]

Three Hall of Famer's.

Mats Sundin 	Player 	2012 	2009
Pavel Bure 	        Player 	2012 	1991–1998
Igor Larionov 	Player 	2008 	1989–1992
Mark Messier 	Player 	2007 	1997–2000
Cam Neely 	        Player 	2005 	1983–1986
Roger Neilson 	Builder 	2002 	1981–1984
Frank Griffiths 	Builder 	1993 	1974–1994
Bud Poile 	        Builder 	1990 	1970–1973
Jake Milford 	Builder 	1984 	1977–1982

So much for a storied franchise.... lol

The crappiest part is every player on that list had some negative attached to their time here (Bure for the obvious, Larionov for his battles with soviet sports, Neely nuff said, Messier nuff said, and Sundin for the whole drama of will he wont he).

 

[Shareefruck]

Bryan Marchment was the type of defenseman we lacked in the Bruins series.

I disagree.

 

[ginner classic]

....ummm how is Hamhuis not on here? The best defenseman on the best team in franchise history...enough said. lol you have Mitchell on here and not Hamhuis .....eeeeek.

Ohlund was every bit as good as Hamhuis defensively, way better offensively and more of a physical force.

shocking that this is close. I think less of my fellow HF posters.

 

[kmad]

Three Hall of Famer's.

Famers*

 

[kmad]

Ohlund was every bit as good as Hamhuis defensively, way better offensively and more of a physical force.

Ohlund and Hamhuis may have similar instincts but Ohlund was definitely slower on his skates than Hamhuis. Offensively, Ohlund has shown a little more, but he's not so far ahead that it makes his case. Ohlund takes physicality in a walk.

Right now you have to take Ohlund based on career value, but Hamhuis could surpass him in a few years, especially if the Canucks keep making noise in the playoffs.