Canucks/Messier arbitration

[JohnnyDrama]

A thought that hadn't really occurred to me before but I'll ask it now: were Vancouver fans really expecting a 36 year old entering his 19th season (I had to double check this because I couldn't believe it was his 19th season) to make the team that much better?

 

[MGiuseffi1969]

Now, for the third time, how old are you?

Randy, Does it really matter how old he is? My college professor for American History was fantastic.... He was a well respected "expert" on the American Revolution, Civil War, etc. He was NOT 300 years old. Based upon your "logic", the only opinions that matter are folks that were actually alive or in this case fans during the era. You certainly have the right to only respect people in your age demographic, but to say a younger person's opinions don't count, is rediculous and unfair.

I guess, I better run over to my son's school and ask for some ID's. I don't want my 4th grader learning about WW2 from anyone under 90!

 

[bamlinden]

Randy, Does it really matter how old he is? My college professor for American History was fantastic.... He was a well respected "expert" on the American Revolution, Civil War, etc. He was NOT 300 years old. Based upon your "logic", the only opinions that matter are folks that were actually alive or in this case fans during the era. You certainly have the right to only respect people in your age demographic, but to say a younger person's opinions don't count, is rediculous and unfair.

I guess, I better run over to my son's school and ask for some ID's. I don't want my 4th grader learning about WW2 from anyone under 90!

Who would have a better take on it....somebody quoting from a book or somebody who watched 50...60...70...80% of the games?

I think the age question is a fair one.

I'd prefer to learn from a person who was a part of WWIi than a person reading from a book.

Both can be valuable tools though (books vs real life experience).

 

[newfiecomicguy1]

Even with all the bickering the case is that the Canucks owe Messier the money so just pay it. This is certainly not the only case in history where an older player was brought in and the team didn't perform well. Messier is a fantastic leader but obviously he didn't click with the players there, it happens. Chaulk it up to experience, learn from it. Moose is certainly not the only player to be brought into the Canucks organization and have a sub par season. As a Leaf fan I have a lifetime of similar situations, older experienced players don't always work out.

 

[cassijon]

messier sucked the life out of the team, the life out of the fans, and the money out of the nucks.

it's as simple as that.

 

[kmitchel]

Randy, Does it really matter how old he is? My college professor for American History was fantastic.... He was a well respected "expert" on the American Revolution, Civil War, etc. He was NOT 300 years old. Based upon your "logic", the only opinions that matter are folks that were actually alive or in this case fans during the era. You certainly have the right to only respect people in your age demographic, but to say a younger person's opinions don't count, is rediculous and unfair.

Mike,

Given that metrags has dismissed Randy (and possibly Tiger Tiger and myself, not sure if we're counted in this group) already as irrational Vancouverites, I'm curious on what it would take for him to feel that *rational* Vancouverites could add to this conversation or if he feels that such a thing could exist when it comes to reviewing Messier's stay in Vancouver.

I can speak for Randy and myself, we are of an age where we watched 30-40 games of those seasons and listened to the radio broadcast for the rest, we saw how Messier played, we saw the articles written during his stay and we've seen the stuff that has come out since. We have opinions based more on just a boxscore.

Maybe the question shouldn't be "How old are you?", maybe the more appropriate questions is, "How many Canucks games did you watch?", because an opinion based 2500 miles away and not watching the games, reading the local articles, etc. is very different than the opinion of someone who is local. I don't feel I could give a fair judgement on say, MDZ as a player above/beyond his statistics because I don't often watch Rangers games at 4:00/4:30 my time, I usually turn on different teams that I enjoy watching at those start times.

In the late 90s, I don't believe there was a Center Ice package (yes, there was satellites, but those were somewhat rare), so to dismiss someone local to a team as irrational because they have an opinion opposite your own when it is doubtful that you watched any/many games of that team is rude.

I do believe Randy's question of age is of some merit, I was born in 1975, any hockey player who had a career ending prior to 1979 or so, **I** don't feel I can give a completely fair judgement on as I likely didn't see them play in person or on TV much.

Your American History professor may have been a great instructor, but I'm sure if it were somehow possible (time travel, REALLY long lives, whatever), he would love to interview someone who was there at those time. As Brett said, there's value from hearing from someone who lived during an event. Yes, your kid CAN learn about WW2 from someone who is only 30-40, but if your kid had a chance to learn from someone who was there, I think it would be more insightful. I had a chance to hear stories from my grandfather (Cdn Navy) and his brother (Cdn Army) and they added an insight that book learning or a lecture wouldn't have provided.

Also, Ryan - to some extent, the Canucks org. did expect more from a 36 year old in his 19th season who as a 35 year old in his 18th season got 84 points in 71 games (97 pt pace). I don't have TOI comparisons, but I'm guessing ice time was about the same, and Messier did tend to get top 6 ice time playing with talented linemates.

Kevin

 

[MGiuseffi1969]

Mike,

Given that metrags has dismissed Randy (and possibly Tiger Tiger and myself, not sure if we're counted in this group) already as irrational Vancouverites, I'm curious on what it would take for him to feel that *rational* Vancouverites could add to this conversation or if he feels that such a thing could exist when it comes to reviewing Messier's stay in Vancouver.

I can speak for Randy and myself, we are of an age where we watched 30-40 games of those seasons and listened to the radio broadcast for the rest, we saw how Messier played, we saw the articles written during his stay and we've seen the stuff that has come out since. We have opinions based more on just a boxscore.

Maybe the question shouldn't be "How old are you?", maybe the more appropriate questions is, "How many Canucks games did you watch?", because an opinion based 2500 miles away and not watching the games, reading the local articles, etc. is very different than the opinion of someone who is local. I don't feel I could give a fair judgement on say, MDZ as a player above/beyond his statistics because I don't often watch Rangers games at 4:00/4:30 my time, I usually turn on different teams that I enjoy watching at those start times.

In the late 90s, I don't believe there was a Center Ice package (yes, there was satellites, but those were somewhat rare), so to dismiss someone local to a team as irrational because they have an opinion opposite your own when it is doubtful that you watched any/many games of that team is rude.

I do believe Randy's question of age is of some merit, I was born in 1975, any hockey player who had a career ending prior to 1979 or so, **I** don't feel I can give a completely fair judgement on as I likely didn't see them play in person or on TV much.

Your American History professor may have been a great instructor, but I'm sure if it were somehow possible (time travel, REALLY long lives, whatever), he would love to interview someone who was there at those time. As Brett said, there's value from hearing from someone who lived during an event. Yes, your kid CAN learn about WW2 from someone who is only 30-40, but if your kid had a chance to learn from someone who was there, I think it would be more insightful. I had a chance to hear stories from my grandfather (Cdn Navy) and his brother (Cdn Army) and they added an insight that book learning or a lecture wouldn't have provided.

Also, Ryan - to some extent, the Canucks org. did expect more from a 36 year old in his 19th season who as a 35 year old in his 18th season got 84 points in 71 games (97 pt pace). I don't have TOI comparisons, but I'm guessing ice time was about the same, and Messier did tend to get top 6 ice time playing with talented linemates.

Kevin

You make some great points.:beer: No doubt that a "living history" reference is a terrific source. My Grandmother is 100 and I ask her about he childhood and the way she remembers WWI, and what NYC was like back them, etc... I'm 43 and did watch my share of Canucks games back then. Not nearly as much as you guys of course, but did travel to plenty of sports bars to watch Messier play via satellite. I guess I was just offended by asking Metrags his age as if to say "shut up junior" and this is an "adult conversation". I would hope that this is a site that allows everyone to voice their opinion regardless of their age, etc...

 

[Orca Pod]

I guess I was just offended by asking Metrags his age as if to say "shut up junior" and this is an "adult conversation". I would hope that this is a site that allows everyone to voice their opinion regardless of their age, etc...

Mike, buddy, that was not the intent of the question at all. The only person I would ever say 'shut up junior' or 'this is an adult conversation' to is Chinner.

There are experts of various ages in many topics. However, as Kevin pointed out, if Metrags is in the age range I think he is, I highly doubt he would have seen more than 5 Canuck games a season during Messier's time. Hell, half of them would have past his bedtime (if he is as young as I believe him to be).

When someone uses frickin' Wikepedia to base an opinion/argument, many people (not just me) have a very hard time taking them seriously. I would never consider anyone an 'expert' or even 'knowledgable' on a topic if they only rattled off stuff they find on Wiki or most other internet sources.

 

[JohnnyDrama]

Mike, buddy, that was not the intent of the question at all. The only person I would ever say 'shut up junior' or 'this is an adult conversation' to is Chinner.

Liar.

 

[newfiecomicguy1]

Did Bure ever get the money from the Canucks? I remember that being a big deal back in the day.

 

[kmitchel]

Liar.

Shut Up Junior, Randy wasn't talking to you. We're having an adult conversation here.



:devil:

 

[kmitchel]

Did Bure ever get the money from the Canucks? I remember that being a big deal back in the day.

And wanting to spin this thread into yet another subject - which time of Bure wanting (more) money from the Canucks is this regarding.

There was the payment that needed to be paid to the Russian Hockey Fed that the Canucks didn't want to pay for his release before he played a single game, but ended up paying 200K+ to get him over. The Canucks didn't pay one that Larionov had and that was one reason he want to SJ a few years later.

There was a rumour+ of a Bure implied/threatened holdout during the 94 playoffs unless his contract was re-negotiated.

There was a issue about getting paid during the 94-95 lockout. Guaranteed contract or not, etc.

There was a issue about getting paid for his holdout before the trade to Florida.

There was also an issue at some point on Cdn/US dollars as well.

Kevin

 

[newfiecomicguy1]

Never mind, let it run its Messier bashing route. They both seem to be the same topic not another spin at all...Canucks owing players money lol.

Bure was owed money because of the way his contract was structured and the Canucks didn't want to pay him because of the lock out....something along those lines. I remember good old Burke was involved. There was an article in one of the hockey magazines last month about it, good read. This thread reminded me of the Bure situation. First time I heard about Messier being owed money so it made me wonder why the Canucks were holding back money on these 2 and if there were more in a similar situation.

 

[kmitchel]

Never mind, let it run its Messier bashing route. They both seem to be the same topic not another spin at all...Canucks owing players money lol.

Bure was owed money because of the way his contract was structured and the Canucks didn't want to pay him because of the lock out....something along those lines. I remember good old Burke was involved. There was an article in one of the hockey magazines last month about it, good read. This thread reminded me of the Bure situation. First time I heard about Messier being owed money so it made me wonder why the Canucks were holding back money on these 2 and if there were more in a similar situation.

I believe that the lockout dispute went to arbitration as well [but much quicker compared to this Messier issue], but the money was held in trust the whole time. I have to assume that has been paid since.

I don't have my old Hockey News available, but I believe that a handful of other players around league were in similar situations. I seem to recall (again, 18 years ago), that Gretzky had a similar concern, but the Kings didn't want to play hardball, so they paid him no problems. (It could've been Mario or Hull as well - but one of the big names of the time).

Kevin

 

[bigzippy]

I dont really understand why this is an issue at all.

All we are doing is debating how badly the nucks sucked at one specific time.

I am 31 live 4500 miles away and never watched the team play until the year 2006 and I know FOR A FACT that no matter who plays for them they do, have, and always will suck! :devil:

Go :flames: Go

Pete

 

[Orca Pod]

yada blah yada blah

yada blah yada blah know FOR A FACT that no matter who plays for them they do, have, and always will suck! :devil:

Go :flames: Go

Pete

Good one, sir.

 

[tiger tiger]

There are 2 issues being discussed here. The OT, which basically said that Messier was getting money awarded based on his contract. Nobody is arguing that he isn't legally entitled to that money.

The other issue that came up because of the settlement was Vancouver fans recalled how Messier totally did not deserve the money and caused more problems than good. To have Metrags pretty much label us blind and irrational fans is pretty hypocritical, and this has caused a stir. Don't know why Canuck fans all of a sudden got such a bad rap around the league.

I, for one, try to look at all teams, including my home team through fair eyes. I try not to be a homer because I'm just not that type of fan. I'm a fan of hockey first, then my team.

If Messier played for another team, and I got to see the same things I saw, I'd say exactly the same things I've said, without prejudice. I hope that I give the impression that I call them as I see them.

None of the Canucks fans said that Messier was supposed to make a winner out of the Canucks. As I said before, I thought it was a bad decision by ownership. But the truth of the matter is that Messier played poorly too, especially defensively. I make this point for the 3rd time because it was so obvious. Messier would leave his check to head up the ice before the Canucks had the puck, and the puck would be in the net, scored by the guy he left. Or he was lazy on his back check, and left his guy open, and puck in the net.

We're not bashing Messier for the sake of bashing him or because he beat the Canucks in 94. He just plain sucked when he was on the Canucks. For me, it wouldn't be any different if it was Gretzky/Sakic/Crosby/Ovechkin and he played exactly the same way Mess did. Messier just played bad hockey in Vancouver.

Everyone knew that Mess was a declining asset offensively, but we expected some veteran leadership and intensity based on the reputation that preceded him and that doesn't decline with age. However, that does declines because you don't give a rats azz about the team you're supposedly trying to lead, and Canuck fans got a first hand look at that game in and game out. In the end, Messier's heart was always in NY and Edm, and he should have never came to Vancouver.

If you ask a 100 true Canucks fans to be honest about their opinion of Messier's time here, most will say it was a bad idea. Not just that the team was bad statistically, but from a team concept.

Plus each would have a different memory of some play or incident which was their WTF moment.

 

[Metrags]

To have Metrags pretty much label us blind and irrational fans is pretty hypocritical

Dont think I called you one. It was directed at the OP who tends to run his mouth a little too much. I can respect an honest discussion minus the nonsensical bashing.

But the truth of the matter is that Messier played poorly too, especially defensively.

He was never a defensive player. Hence the conundrum the Rags faced when they used him as a "defensive player" in his next stint with us (remember the -25????).

I know I know he wasn't labeled a defensive forward by the organization. But when we needed a goal we put the Nedved line out there first, when we needed to protect a lead we put the Moose line out first.

He just plain sucked when he was on the Canucks. For me, it wouldn't be any different if it was Gretzky/Sakic/Crosby/Ovechkin and he played exactly the same way Mess did. Messier just played bad hockey in Vancouver.

He didn't do very well statswise. However nor did anyone on the team. So for some persons to hold it all against a 36 year old "exceptional" player is asinine. (the same reason why I dont hold the Mets lacklusterness against Jason Bay....... completely)

If you ask 100 true Canucks fans to be honest about their opinion of Messier's time here, most will say it was a bad idea. Not just that the team was bad statistically, but from a team concept.

Completely agree there. They had no need to bring him in, and dismantling the team (The faces, Linden then Bure, mainly) afterwards compounded the lockerroom (and fan) atmosphere.

Plus each would have a different memory of some play or incident which was their WTF moment.

The signing itself was any Ranger's fans WTF moment. I mean really??? The Nucks??? :beer:






On another related note, the Nucks also brought in Mogilny at the same time to take the team to the next level....And the Rags signed his former aging centermen LaFontaine....

 

[tiger tiger]

He was never a defensive player. Hence the conundrum the Rags faced when they used him as a "defensive player" in his next stint with us (remember the -25????).


He didn't do very well statswise. However nor did anyone on the team. So for some persons to hold it all against a 36 year old "exceptional" player is asinine. (the same reason why I dont hold the Mets lacklusterness against Jason Bay....... completely)

I'm not saying he was a defensive player. I'm saying he played poor defense. All players have defensive responsibilities. He would flake off his defensive checks, and Keenan would let him get away with it, and Messier never took any responsibility for his mistakes. I'm not holding the team's poor performance on him. I'm holding his own poor performance on him.

When we watched Messier, it was so obvious that he was mailing it in. I get that he's 36 years old and well past his prime, but in Vancouver, he wasn't even trying. There would be opportunities to just stick check, and he didn't even do that. That is what was so frustrating. We're not expecting him to be a power forward, or to be a banger, or to score on a breakaway. Just play good team hockey. If a rookie was playing the way he was, he'd be sent to the minors and would be told that he needs to work on the defensive parts of his game.

IMO, he was supposed to be a competitor, and all I saw was a guy floating around, trying to pad his points so that he could be 2nd all time in scoring, and get paid big bucks to do it. Messier should have retired instead of signing with the Canucks. Or signed a 1 yr deal with the NYR as a farewell tour. Even his 2nd tour of duty in NY shouldn't have happened. It's painful to watch a legend try to play a game which has clearly past him. In the twilight of his career, he was a bum.

There are guys that aren't ready to retire, some that learn quickly that it's time to retire, and some guys that are in denial.

Selanne and Jagr has shown that they can still compete and can go for another year. Modano tried and failed, but wants to come back, although he shouldn't. Hasek is dreaming.

 

[Metrags]

Selanne and Jagr has shown that they can still compete and can go for another year. Modano tried and failed, but wants to come back, although he shouldn't. Hasek is dreaming.

Dont forget Brett Hull's teary farewell......

And Forsberg's....well...... I dont know what we call that....