Would Mark Messier be considered greater if he retired after 1994?

overpass

Registered User
Jun 7, 2007
5,254
2,736
Can you prove they would have been worse without Messier?

Vancouver was 10 wins and 13 points better the year before Messier arrived and they were 6 wins and 7 points better the year after he left. And that is with team points in Messier `s final year being inflated due to the OT loss points coming into effect that season.

Who would have played centre for them if Messier wasn't there? Other centres on those teams included Dave Scatchard, Harry York, old Peter Zezel, and it gets worse. I doubt the Canucks would have been better with those guys playing Messier's 23 minutes per game.

I'm no fan of Messier's Vancouver years, but the team has to take some of the blame. They had absolutely zero depth at centre, and when Messier wasn't what they hoped, they were screwed.
 

David Bruce Banner

Nude Cabdriver Ban
Mar 25, 2008
7,947
3,217
Streets Ahead
Who would have played centre for them if Messier wasn't there? Other centres on those teams included Dave Scatchard, Harry York, old Peter Zezel, and it gets worse. I doubt the Canucks would have been better with those guys playing Messier's 23 minutes per game.

I'm no fan of Messier's Vancouver years, but the team has to take some of the blame. They had absolutely zero depth at centre, and when Messier wasn't what they hoped, they were screwed.

On the other hand they could have quite easily spent that FA money elsewhere... and to better use.
 

Kirikanoir

Registered User
Dec 16, 2010
1,576
40
On the other hand they could have quite easily spent that FA money elsewhere... and to better use.

Very true, with that 7 million a season Messier got they could probably have afforded 2 cheaper centers that would have provided a little more depth.

As well did not Trevor Linden switch to center later in his career?
 

vadim sharifijanov

Registered User
Oct 10, 2007
28,585
15,948
I find it interesting when people talk about how Messier failed as a leader late in his career, but nobody talks about what an awful leader Yzerman was early in his career. I mean, it's well known that Bowman wanted to trade Yzerman because he didn't want to commit to two-way (winning) hockey until he had matured.

Also, I don't see why Yzerman is considered a better leader than Scott Stevens, other than the fact that he played in a bigger market.

i personally have stevens near the top of my all-time leaders list and wouldn't blink twice to see him above yzerman, but to be fair, how great was stevens pre-NJ? i don't know for sure, but seems like he was pretty out of control in washington (to say nothing of certain allegations), and he was named captain of an excellent contending blues team as soon as he signed there, but they ultimately disappointed in the playoffs (sounds like early 90s yzerman, no?)
 

overpass

Registered User
Jun 7, 2007
5,254
2,736
Very true, with that 7 million a season Messier got they could probably have afforded 2 cheaper centers that would have provided a little more depth.

As well did not Trevor Linden switch to center later in his career?

Right, there's no defending the contract from Vancouver's point of view. They probably would have been better off signing two cheaper centres.

Hindsight is 20-20, of course, and it's easy to say now that it was a bad deal. But they were signing Messier for his age 37-39 seasons. Very few great centres have been strong first-line centres at that age. As of 1997, Jean Beliveau was probably the only one - in a league that had just doubled in size, on a Montreal team had ridiculous depth at centre. Vancouver was basically counting on Messier bringing another MVP performance when that just wasn't realistic.

Now that I think about it, you're right that Linden was the plan for 2nd line centre at the time. So I guess you can blame Messier for the lack of depth at centre, to some degree. The Canucks did well from a talent perspective in that trade but they took a couple of years to fill the hole at centre.
 

pld459666

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
25,776
7,800
Danbury, CT
.

Yes the team struggled the year before, which was one of the reasons Messier was brought here to begin with. And Messier responded with (at that time) one of the worst seasons of his career. Yet of course according to the Messier apologists none of that is his fault.



Of course Messier could have done what Mats Sundin did and sign for half of what the Canucks offered.



Linden offered Messier the captaincy for the good of the team because of Messier`s reputation of being a great team leader. A reputation and responsibility that in his Vancouver days at least proved to be overrated and undeserved.



Yep Leetch had a great playoff when he won his one cup. But then again so did Linden that year. Including being the best Canuck on the ice and scoring 2 goals and doing everything in his power to will his team to victory in that pivotal Game 7 of the 94 cup final.



Where in my comments have I blamed Messier for the (BTW 39 ) seasons of failure of the Canucks? The only years I have blamed Messier for are the years he played on Vancouver.




Did you actually even read my whole post? Or our you simply ignoring the part where I stated Mike Keenan was as much or more to blame for the three year disaster of the Keenan, Messier experiment. And to add to that I`ll throw equal blame at the ownership at that time that hired these turds to begin with.




He did nothing right.



Three years, -player six of his last seven years. Teams missed playoffs 7 of his last 7 years.

Clearly did nothing to make those teams any better, in fact no question Vancouver got worse on ice and off after Messier arrived.



By that time management consisted of Messier`s buddy Mike Keenan. And what player would have stepped up and said boo after watching the franchise player and one of the most popular Canucks ever get traded.




Why am I not surprised. Frankly I would take anyone of Linden`s years as captain over the ego from hell, AKA Mark Messier years.



And there were players with less flattering views.



Again in regards to pure talent and skills, peak or not its Bure and again its not even close.

Naslund was a great player but no amount of spin doctoring will make him the greatest canuck ever, ahead of guys like Stan Smyl, or Trevor Linden.



As opposed to floating for three years to collect a paycheck like Messier did. And funny but if a 51 goals 90 point player who was a plus player that year was a floater, I think we could use have used a few more of those type of floaters.

And if those numbers make Bure a floater what do you call Messier who only managed 51 goals in three years, one more than Bure bagged in one season. As well as Messier finishing a combined -37 in those three years.

Talk to Markus Naslund about what Messier meant to him being there and what kind of player Messier helped him become.

Get back to me after you have had that conversation.

thanks.
 

vadim sharifijanov

Registered User
Oct 10, 2007
28,585
15,948
Talk to Markus Naslund about what Messier meant to him being there and what kind of player Messier helped him become.

Get back to me after you have had that conversation.

thanks.

After Messier returned to New York, the Canucks quickly tabbed Naslund as team captain, certainly a honor. But while Naslund says he has learned from both Messier and Lemieux, and is appreciative of their leaderships skills, he isn't a clone of either player.

''I was never going make the kind of impact Mess does because I was never going to be the physical force he is,'' Naslund said shortly after becoming captain. ''In his last year here, a lot of players were scared to say anything in the locker room with Mark in the room. To me, the best way to improve a team�s chemistry is through give and take.

''And while I was in awe watching Mario, I was young," he said. "What I learned most from him is that Mario has something that not a lot of people have. He doesn't think he ever is going to fail. When you always have that approach, that you're going to make it, that you are going to make a difference, the mind is a pretty powerful thing.''

http://www.nhl.com/intheslot/read/indepth/naslund/blossoms.html
 

Kirikanoir

Registered User
Dec 16, 2010
1,576
40
Talk to Markus Naslund about what Messier meant to him being there and what kind of player Messier helped him become.

Get back to me after you have had that conversation.

thanks.


''In his last year here, a lot of players were scared to say anything in the locker room with Mark in the room. To me, the best way to improve a team�s chemistry is through give and take.

Very interesting, and revealing quote.
 

TheDevilMadeMe

Registered User
Aug 28, 2006
52,271
6,980
Brooklyn
i personally have stevens near the top of my all-time leaders list and wouldn't blink twice to see him above yzerman, but to be fair, how great was stevens pre-NJ? i don't know for sure, but seems like he was pretty out of control in washington (to say nothing of certain allegations), and he was named captain of an excellent contending blues team as soon as he signed there, but they ultimately disappointed in the playoffs (sounds like early 90s yzerman, no?)

Oh, I don't think Stevens was that great a leader before NJ. It's a little before my (hockey conscious) time, though. He was named captain as soon as he came to NJ (long time captain Bruce Driver gave up the captaincy for Stevens), so he must have had some stature. Also, as early as 1995, he was willing to sacrifice his personal statistics for the good of the team and the rest of the team followed.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->