Talk:Vancouver Canucks

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
 This article is part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Ice Hockey, an attempt at building a useful ice hockey resource. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page (see Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ for more information).

Ice hockey Portal
B This article has been rated as b-Class on the quality scale.
Portal:Vancouver
 Vancouver Portal
This article is part of WikiProject Vancouver, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada and the surrounding metropolitan area. To participate, edit the article attached to this page or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
B This article has been rated as b-Class on the quality scale.
High This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale.
If you have rated this article please consider adding assessment comments.
This article is part of WikiProject British Columbia, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to British Columbia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Portal:British Columbia
 British Columbia Portal
B This article has been rated as b-Class on the quality scale.
High This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale.
If you have rated this article please consider adding assessment comments.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project member page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
High This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale.

Contents

[edit] List of Vancouver Canucks players

I have started a List of Vancouver Canucks players. It would be a great help if when adding a player to the main Canucks article that you could also add him to the list. Thanks! Masterhatch 12 August 2005

[edit] Hall of Famers

http://www.legendsofhockey.net:8080/LegendsOfHockey/jsp/LegendsPlayersByTeam.jsp?team=Vancouver+Canucks

The HHOF inducts more than just players, and more than just NHLers. Also, the Canucks are more than just an NHL franchise - they were a PCHL and WHL franchise as well.

Likewise, there is a consensus criteria for the Hall of Fame team sections; players must have played a significant portion of their careers with a particular team to be mentioned in that team section, and those seasons must significantly and meaningfully contribute to their HHOF selection. (It's damned tough, for instance, to make that argument for Cam Neely as a Canuck, when contemporary media guides just before the trade cite his play as a disappointment) Non-players must be significantly associated with the team. Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Ice_Hockey for discussion. RGTraynor 18:02, September 4, 2005 (UTC)
And just to safe my bets, I went back and looked over the WHL players listed. Stanley, Esposito, Bower and Worsley each played only a single season or less for the WHL Canucks; that's not significant even by the slightly lower standards we've been employing in the minor league entries. Andy Bathgate's the only entry who played any significant time for the WHL Canucks; at least he played four seasons there. RGTraynor 18:11, September 4, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Not to be forgotten

The former Canucks in this list must be widely considered to have made significant contributions to the club and/or the game, and ideally have been recognized for it with a hall of fame induction, league or team award(s), and/or by setting a league or team record - and have not been mentioned anywhere else in the article.

http://www.comnet.ca/~dmarchak/canaward.htm

http://www.bchhf.com/

http://www.canucks.com/subpage.asp?sectionID=27

http://www.rauzulusstreet.com/hockey/nhlrecords/nhlrecords.html

Personal favourites, local boys, and one playoff/game wonders don't count.

There is a consensus standard for the NTBF sections on the NHL team pages which is being applied (as time permits) league-wide and which has been completed for Vancouver. This standard broadly encompasses a floor level of twelve players for post 1967-teams, as well as players of unusual notoriety (Tiger Williams, for instance), and is roughly based on team career leaders for games played, points, and league honors (with an eye towards a balance of eras and positions), while only excluding team captains, Hall of Famers and current squad members already cited. Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Ice_Hockey/Team_pages_format if you have any further questions or you wish to reopen the discussion as to the criteria used. I'll be reverting the list momentarily. RGTraynor 05:17, September 4, 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for pointing out this discussion of a guideline - I was not aware of it.
However, I thoroughly researched my initial inclusions to this list:
Babych was a rock on defense for 409 games over seven seasons, third player to play his 1000th NHL game as a Canuck, and recorded 27 points in the playoffs.
Geoff Courtnall is a BC Hockey Hall of Fame inductee who recorded 246 points in 292 games, was the first Canuck to score two regular season overtime goals in one season (1990-91), scored 11 game winning goals in 1992-93 (tied for NHL lead), was third in team scoring during 1994 playoffs (19 points) and scored 5 regular season overtime goals (2nd highest in team history). He stands 8th in career game winning goals as a Canuck.
Gelinas is a Cyclone Taylor Trophy, Molson Cup, Most Exciting Player, and 2-time Fred J. Hume Award winner who recorded 171 points in 258 games as a Canuck and recorded 12 playoff points in three seasons.
Lumme is a 4-time Babe Pratt Trophy winner who tied a team record for most career points by a defenseman. He stands 10th in career games played and 8th in career assists as a Canuck.
Skriko is a Molson Cup and 2-time Cyrus H. McLean Trophy winner who produced 373 points in 472 games and once scored two short-handed goals during the same penalty. He stands 6th in career regular season overtime goals, 9th in career first goals, 5th in career shorthanded goals, 10th in career powerplay goals, 10th in career game winning goals, 10th in career points, 9th in career goals and had 4 consecutive 30+ goal seasons as a Canuck.
Sundstrom is a President's Trophy, Molson Cup, Cyclone Taylor Trophy and 2-time Cyrus H. McLean Trophy winner who was the first Canuck to record 90 points in a season, holds team records for most assists (6) and points (7) in one game and was the first Canuck to score a regular season overtime goal.
I can understand leaving Courtnall or even Sundstrom or Adams off the list, but to replace them with Halward?!? (A Fred J. Hume Award and Babe Pratt Trophy winner, but on a famously weak defensive team and with a career plus/minus of -99, and single season plus/minus of -39 - both the 5th worst by an individual in the history of the NHL club.) Ronning, Ververgaert and Kearns (who has the Canucks worst career plus/minus record at -157) make more sense, but are still inappropriate choices for a list this short. I would love to hear your justifications for these picks. In fact, I expect to hear them from you or I will definitely be reverting the list.
Also, no one besides Canucks fans, to my knowledge, refers to Greg Adams as "Gus". I'd rather not see a precedent set and stuff like "Cookie" and "Jovocop" and "Sisters" start popping up all over. 154.20.170.147 00:10, September 5, 2005 (UTC)
Maybe that distinction was made because there were 3 pro hockey players named Greg Adams, 2 of which suited up for the Canucks. "Gus" is by far the most notable though. ccwaters 11:17, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

I agree that some of those players should be in the "not to be forgotten" section, but there is another solution: Mention those players in the actual article in the Canucks history section. The Canucks history section is kinda short and could use expanding. Mentioning notable trades and achievments by those other players in the history section would take care of that problem. Just a thought. Masterhatch 4 September 2005

Allow me to explain a bit more about the criteria. For one thing, the intent is to balance era and position both. The NTBF pages overwhelmingly favored forwards who'd played within the last fifteen seasons. The Canucks (as with most teams) have been around longer than that, and a balanced NTBF would include players from the Seventies as well as a proper number of defensemen. Furthermore, since I'm not a Vancouver local with personal axes to grind, I can rely a bit more on the historical record. I definitely missed Lumme, no error, and Skriko probably should be in there, but assertions that Dennis Kearns doesn't belong? Kearns is the Canucks' career scoring leader on defense, and that he had a mediocre plus-minus during the decade when everyone on the team did doesn't much signify, unless you do not believe that the Seventies deserve recognition. Gelinas had only two good seasons for Vancouver; if everyone who played two or three good years for a team were included in NTBF, the sections would be a hundred players deep. That aside, Ronning and Ververgaert just plain outplayed and outscored him -- Ronning didn't have a mere 12 playoff points, he had 15 in the 1994 playoffs alone, and Ververgaert was named to play in two NHL All-Star Games, an honor neither Gelinas, Sundstrom or Skriko ever received.
Ultimately, the aim of choosing isn't to cite career marks or local awards (or statistical blips like in what uniform a player played his thousandth game, where he went to college or how many assists he logged in a single game) to justify inclusion of the players you've already decided you want. It's to go over the career marks and league awards to select the players at the top of the heap. Canucks history didn't start in the mid-Eighties; NTBF shouldn't start from that date either. RGTraynor 17:36, September 4, 2005 (UTC)
You don't have to convince me (I was the one that suggested the restrictions on NTBF in the first place). I was merely offering up a solution to avoid a potential edit war. Gelinas, for example, while his numbers don't put him in the NTBF, the way he was delt with by Iron Mike needs to at least have his name mentioned somewhere on the page. Actually, I think the short time that Keenan was behind the bench of the Canucks had a major impact on the team today and a short paragraph in the history section describing the affects and after-affects of all his wheelings and dealings needs to be written. People here in Vancouver, (for the most part) hated him because he traded away all the old fan favourites, but they were just that, old fan favourites. He brought in a lot of youth and previously underachievers (namely Todd) and set the team in the right direction. Honestly, I think this entire Canucks page needs to be re-worked and expanded (such as a better and more thorough description of their two Cup runs), but alas, I don't have time as I have too many other projects on the go that I think are more important. Masterhatch 5 September 2005
Oh, I'm not addressing you, Masterhatch, I'm answering the anonymous fellow. And I agree that Canucks history in general deserves more column space; perhaps the poster would be pleased to fill it out. RGTraynor 02:41, September 5, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Greg "Gus" Adams

I was the one who named him Greg "Gus" Adams. I did that as a way of separating the two Greg Adams that have played in the NHL. If a better way to separate the Adams exists, then I will be happy to hear suggestions. Using "nicknames" is, in my humble opinion, a good way of separating players with the same name and separating players who share a name with someone else famous who wasn't a hockey player. Masterhatch 4 September 2005

The 'other' Greg Adams was generally referred to as "Greg C. Adams," and he barely played for the Canucks (or any NHL team, for that matter), so I wouldn't be too concerned about confusion. -J21
Any idea what Greg C. Adams middle name actually was? Masterhatch 02:39, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Players' Nationalities

The flags are a neat idea, but I feel compelled to point out that putting German and Korean flags for Sven Butenschon (a Canadian citizen who learned to play hockey in Alberta) and Richard Park (a U.S. citizen who learned his hockey in Ontario) respectively, is a little misleading. -J21

Hm. This is worth discussing on the Team Pages Format talk page. RGTraynor 04:22, 16 September 2005 (UTC)
I don't think it is misleading at all to put a Korean flag next to Richard Park. He was born in Korea to Korean parents. He is a Korean who came to North America at an early age. If you don't put a Korean flag next to Park, what do you put? An American flag? Sure that might in some cases, but Park learned hockey in Canada, so then do you put a Canadian flag next to his name? Trying to separate out players by where they learned hockey or what citizenship(s) they have becomes just way too confusing and complicated and that would involve creating a list of "rules" how to classify players. It is so much simpler to just go by their birth country. It seems wrong to put anything but a Korean flag next to Park. Anyways, the discussion is being continued here: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ice Hockey/Team pages format Masterhatch 14:30, 16 September 2005 (UTC)
Park has US citizenship and plays for Team USA in international tournaments. According to the page Masterhatch referred to, that is justification for an American flag in Park's case because there is no question to which country he pledges allegiance to. --Buchanan-Hermit 17:00, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Current Roster hijinks

Hrm. CC, Masterhatch, do you think it might be time to consider formal Wikipedia proceedings against 24.64.223.203? He keeps putting up his weird squad table, he won't talk to anyone, there are reversion skirmishes all over, and he's blowing off consensus. EarlAndrew, you're a sysop, yes? Is it appropriate at this stage, and if so how do we go about it? RGTraynor 11:03, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

Has he done anything recently? I thought that was over? ccwaters 12:30, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
I haven't seen anything he has done with those templates for a while now. I went and checked his edit history and I saw nothing. Anyways, I put my vote in for deletion on the deletion page. Masterhatch 12:35, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

Nice job with the new template, Masterhatch. About my edits: I know about King's PCS issues and Fedorov's agent whining to the press, but both these guys are still listed on the official team roster, and I don't think they should be removed from the page until we get official word that they're gone. http://www.canucks.com/theteam/roster.asp?sectionID=23 Oystergumbo 10:31, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] The PCHL/WHL years

As the subject is the "Vancouver Canucks", I believe that more info about the early pre-NHL years should be included on the same page. I realize that many only think of the Canucks as an NHL expansion club, but they are wrong. Many/most of the Canucks' WHL players carried over into the NHL, (Kurtenbach, Howie Young, Tracy Pratt, Cesare Maniago, Charlie Hodge, etc.) and I suspect that much of the management did too. Take a look at the Edmonton Oilers page and their reference to the WHA years for example. Unfortunately, info on the early years isn't so easy to find, (for me, anyway) but I'm going to try and do some digging and see what I turn up. If anyone else is interested, please do the same. Also, I find it a bit amazing that there's no mention or link anywhere in the Canucks' entry about the Stanley Cup-winning Millionaires/Maroons, their home ice - the massive (for the time) and innovative Denman Arena, or the Patrick brothers. The Lions of the NWHL/PCHL, and the Blazers of the WHA should be noted as well, in my opinion. Vancouver has a long and fascinating hockey history. This should be recognized. Oystergumbo 11:04, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

But not here. The article is about the Canucks, not about Vancouver hockey history in general. The Blazers have their own page as do the Patricks, and if you want to do up pages for the Millionaires or flesh out the other articles, go for it! Of course, as the one non-WHA team with a clear pre-NHL lineage, I agree that more attention should be paid to the WHL Canucks; heck, it's why I kept Andy Bathgate on the Hall of Fame list for Vancouver, because unlike a number of other players cited, he genuinely was an impact player for the WHL team. RGTraynor 16:45, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
The teams in the PCHL and WHL where the Canucks. So I think it sould be here. 207.81.204.205 04:02, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
If what you mean is that the Canucks' page should discuss the team's PCHL/WHL history, I completely agree -- unique to any other non-WHA team since the NHL was founded, the WHL Vancouver Canucks were admitted to the league outright; there's a clear and unarguable lineage. RGTraynor 05:58, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

There really needs to be a lot more about the pre-NHL Canucks on this page. Reading it over, I could hardly tell that they existed before joining, and I follow the Canucks. And as stated earlier, the best place to include other Vancouver hockey teams would be at the article started for Vancouver sports: Sports in Vancouver. Which if I recall correctly, lacks any reference to the WHA. Kaiser matias 23:04, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. I could do the research, but there's a lot on my plate right now, and deserving WHL teams without a constituency (Seattle Totems, Portland Buckaroos, etc.). RGTraynor 00:37, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rivalries

The Canucks are not an original six club. Listing "rivalries" is a bit sketchy under any circumstances - as every team is technically a rival - but in the case of this expansion club, it is completely frivolous. It should be left on the Rangers/Bruins/Leafs/Habs pages. Oystergumbo 08:05, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Agreed. I can think of some non-Original Six rivalries: Philadelphia-Pittsburgh, Isles-Rangers, Edmonton-Calgary. Not many, though. RGTraynor 08:58, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
You beat me to the punch. I was just about to post a similar response. Notice those teams you mentioned are really close to each other and are in the same state or province. I had already moved Edmonton as a rival off the Canucks page once and it was put back on. Oystergumbo then removed it again. Edmonton isn't in the same province and Vancouver rarely meets them in the playoffs. Masterhatch 09:08, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Logos on Season by season

So WB, you think that it looks better with the blank spots beside the season? Using your reasoning, why don't we use dito marks every time they consecutively miss the playoffs? or consecutively get knocked out in the first round? Those stats are repeating themselves. It looks much better (I think) with the logos beside each season. There is a discussion (although very brief) here and you are quite welcome to post your comments about it there. Also, there are about 4 or 5 teams that do it that way. Changing one and not the others makes no sense. The reason there are only four or five is because I haven't gotten around to finishing them all yet. I have been too busy with my List of NHL seasons of late. Masterhatch 14:36, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

The logos look cool, and seem especially pertinent given the controversial history of Vancouver's uniform changes. RGTraynor 18:40, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
I didn't use that as a source. I pointed you to that site because that is where it is being discussed and if you want to discuss it, that is the best place. Masterhatch 02:35, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

First post here, so please don't flame me if I do it wrong. I notice that the page seems to be protected, probably a good idea, but I was hoping to update the "Logos" section, as there is essentially no mention of the current logo. Let me know if I can help. hammondking

[edit] Vancouver Canucks Records

The recent addition to the Canucks article that lists the career leaders should be moved to its own article, Vancouver Canucks Records, just like Edmonton Oilers Records and Montreal Canadiens Records. Masterhatch 20:50, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Assistant captains

Who's took out the assistant captains and captain? I think those should be there! Marcus1060 04:32, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Someone re-entered them just now. But there's one thing that may change, I think -- Ohlund had the "A" for the game at Long Island. Not sure if that's a permanent move or not. I guess time will tell. --Buchanan-Hermit 15:09, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
Yep, Ohlund's wearing the A. Updated the roster for that. I'm assuming this is because of Jovo (the normal A) not being in the lineup recently. --Buchanan-Hermit 22:32, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
I don't think Ohlund needs to have the A listed, it is only temporary because Jovo's out. It'd make no sense to add and remove A's as people get hurt. To tell you the truth I'm surprised they even gave Ohlund the A at all, I thought Bertuzzi or Linden would have just worn it like they usually do for home games. But it may also be some way of saying "hey even though we took away your A when Linden came back, we still appreciate you blah blah" Marcus1060 06:08, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

I was also surprised that the Canucks had Ohlund wear an "A" while Jovo was injured/out of the line-up. After all, don't the Canucks have Four alternate captains? Oh well, it's up to the Coach. GoodDay 00:25, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Injury Status

Do you think maybe we should she the status of a playes injury? Such as for Jovo DTD, and Cloutier IR? Marcus1060 06:11, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, I've been noting players on IR, (which is a special roster status). Players with Day-to-Day injuries are still counted as on regular rosters and count towards the 23 man limit. They just get scratched for the game-day 20 man rosters. IR is generally more long term and easier to track. I don't feel like maintaining the status of a player that gets scratched 2 games for a sore rib. ccwaters 12:25, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
Hmm... for some reason User:207.6.189.146 deleted Cloutier. It slipped by me. I readded him. ccwaters 12:36, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
So is Jovo on injured reserve now? Marcus1060 01:52, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
Yes, unfortunately. He's going to have surgery. Canucks.com has the story. Buchanan-Hermit™..CONTRIBS..SPEAK! 04:13, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
Yeah I knew his was getting surgery, but for some reason I wasn't sure if he was on the IR, stupid I know :P Marcus1060 04:39, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Is Rypien still with the Canucks? Or was he sent down to Moose with his injury? At the very least he is on injured reserve. Marcus1060 08:45, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

He's not on the Moose... http://www.moosehockey.com/theteam/roster.php . There he is http://www.canucks.com/theteam/roster.asp?sectionID=23&id=238#career . What's his injury? He's probably Day to day and getting scratched. ccwaters 14:31, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

He's injured reserve. Source TSN Marcus1060 22:33, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
Ok. "season ending" broken ankle... http://www.canada.com/theprovince/news/sports/story.html?id=67fc0491-1ce5-4f33-a90c-13b3ca0d7b92&k=56445 ccwaters 03:42, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sven Butenschon's flag

Although he was born in Germany, he was raised in Canada and has personally said that, given a choice, he'd prefer to play for Canada [1]. So that's why I changed his flag from Germany to Canada -- it just makes more sense, since he is more representative of Canada than Germany. --Buchanan-Hermit™..CONTRIBS..SPEAK! 03:15, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

I completely agree. As that is the case with Richard Park too. Marcus1060 01:42, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
Well, in Park's case, he actually played with a national team. Butenschon didn't, but his personal history is the real determining factor, I think. (I'm keeping a record of these instances in my userspace[2]. I'm hoping it will be proposed as a guideline, but it needs more public support.) --Buchanan-Hermit™..CONTRIBS..SPEAK! 01:48, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Salo is not on the injured reserve, he's week to week. Marcus1060 09:02, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Nicknames

How many of those nicknames do you actually hear? I don't think I've even used a quarter of the ones listed. --Buchanan-Hermit™..CONTRIBS..SPEAK! 20:49, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

What nicknames are you talking about exactly? Marcus1060 02:26, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
In the article: Nicknames: "Canuckers", "Nucks," "nuckers", "k'nuck nucks", "nuck nucks", "mighty nucks", "canuckle-heads". I think I've only used Nucks, and I rarely even use that... Buchanan-Hermit™..CONTRIBS..SPEAK! 03:33, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, those are bad... I say only one that should be there is Nucks, so take them out. I though you where refering to player nicknames. Marcus1060 10:42, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Todd Bertuzzi

What's your opinion on Todd Bertuzzi? Did he cost Vancouver a playoff spot? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Pnatt (talk • contribs).

My opinion is that it's a discussion appropriate to a hockey blog or bulletin board, neither of which Wikipedia is. WP:NOT RGTraynor 09:15, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Conference Standings instead of Divison Standings?

I reckon that Conference Standings are much more important to place in an encyclopedia article than the Division Standings. What's your opinion? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Pnatt (talk • contribs).

You're welcome to raise the question over at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Ice_Hockey/Team_pages_format. If you get a consensus behind your idea, then the format might be changed. RGTraynor 09:16, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Firing of Marc Crawford

Noted in the article by me. I wonder who will replace him? :: Colin Keigher 22:48, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Overrated Canucks?

Expected them out in 2006. They must be one of the most overrated teams of the last TEN years. What in the HELL have they accomplished? They should be further ahead by now, like OTT, TB, CGY. I got so sick of the BS of Burke. Glad to see him go. Now Crawford is gonna get chucked. Good riddance Van. CJ DUB 19:15, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Over the last five seasons they've racked up a 208-147 record, something a lot of cities (my own included) would wish to have, although I wouldn't myself call a team overrated and say they should be doing better in the same sentence -- either people expected too much of them or they didn't. Granted, those people who believe that the only measure of success is Cup wins are SOL, but then again only five teams have won Cups in the last ten seasons, so they've plenty of company. RGTraynor 21:02, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

They have not iced a decent playoff team in quite some time. They also miss the playoffs quite a bit. The mark of success is: PROGRESS. Or at least some. They are highly touted but have not improved much in the last 5 years, hence overrated. CJ DUB 01:32, 9 May 2006 (UTC) Sorry I gotta go watch Ottawa get spanked now.

Guess what, this is Wikipedia not Canucks.com - but on that fact, GO CANUCKS GO -- Tawker 07:01, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Minnesota a main rival?

I see the Wild were added on as one of the Canucks' main rivals. The Wild themselves seem to think so -- for reasons I still don't understand -- but I hardly think this is one of the Canucks' bigger rivalries. They have only been in the division a few seasons, and I'd say Edmonton is a bigger rival than Minnesota. J21 22:19, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Being a Canucks fan for a long time, I agree. Minnesota isn't a big rival. It's not even a small rival. It doesn't even deserve to be in the same sentence as the words "Canucks" and "rivals." I'm removing it from the article; they're not a rival at all. -→Buchanan-Hermit™/?! 05:49, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
Definitely a rival, but under the first definition of the word rather than the second like the other teams listed: adversary, antagonist, enemy, foe. -- Steven Fisher 06:52, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] {{{team_history}}}

What's going on with this? I can't even find it to remove it. Marcus1060talk 01:19, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mitchell's jersey number

This pic shows that Mitchell will be wearing the #8 jersey for the Canucks. I'm tempted to add that to the article, but what about Weinrich? He has #8 as well. -→Buchanan-Hermit™/?! 00:51, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

It is pretty much garantueed that he is not going to be a Canuck anymore, technically he isn't even any more. Same with Brookbank, Brown, Linden, Park, Bouck, and Carter. Marcus1060talk 00:58, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Jozef Balej has number 8 too. Geez... -→Buchanan-Hermit™/?! 04:38, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bertuzzi's points

Todd Bertuzzi should be in the top point list. He has 449 points with the Vancouver Canucks.

[edit] NHL awards and trophies

I think Bure should be in this sections, under "Goal-scoring leaders (prior to introduction of 'Rocket' Richard Trophy)" because he led the league in scoring in 1993-94 with 60 goals. Marcus1060 21:06, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Johnny Canuck as mascot origin

Watching Hockey Night in Canada tonight (Flames-Canucks), and Jim Hughson presented a segment coming out of a commercial in the first period. It showed the Johnny Canuck comic book character and stated that as the inspiration for the Canucks nickname when the team was founded in 1945. Johnny Canuck is also on the side of Luongo's helmet. I didn't see this mentioned in the article...possibly for lack of corroborating evidence? It's been presented on TV, though, so we've got the HNIC broadcast to rely on it now. —C.Fred (talk) 03:53, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Colours era

Whats do the follow mean

# 1.2 Blue and Green Era (1970-1978)

  1. 1.3 Orange and Black Era (1978-1997)
  2. 1.4 Blue and Black Era (1997-Present)

If its the colours of the team then it should be spelled out in the article suchs as in 1970 the teams colours changed to blue and green ........... (end of paragraph) In 1978 the colours changed to Orange and Black which fan's consider a different era (Gnevin 16:33, 9 January 2007 (UTC))



[edit] Retired Numbers

We should put retired numbers in the infobox. Also, just for fun, what numbers do u think will be retired?

I think #16Trevor Linden cuz he's a canuck forever. most gp. and maybe retire #19, Markus Naslund, for most goals scored. I mean, nazzy is a great one. Who else do u think?

                       -Qsung
No we shouldn't & speculation on Number Retirements has no place on NHL team pages. GoodDay 22:07, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Curse

I put the 12 year cycle on. If u dont know what it is go read it on the Vancouver Canucks article. It's not really well written so help out with it. Anyway, thoughts about this superstition or coincidence?

At this time of the season, if the Canucks make it to the finals at their current pace, my prediction is that Buffalo would be the team representing New York (since the city happens to be in NY state), and if it does happen, that would just be very weird. Sandtrooper 19:28, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

While I'm fully aware of it, and hope it to be true so this is our year again (would also add New Jersey, as they are only minutes from New York City), it can't be put in the article. At least not yet. If you find some reputable sources that validate it, then I can see it staying. Otherwise it violates WP:NOR. Kaiser matias 21:04, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
WP:NOR and WP:RS apply here, I can't find anything that really sources "the curse". Now, let's let Lunongo be the genius he is and prevent anything like that from happening :) -- Tawker 00:20, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The "Doctored" Photo

That doctored photo of the Canucks in a weird colour scheme was not created on the Canucks.com site. I've been reading into it, and people seem to believe that. That is because they likely live in Vancouver. This photo was doctored by, likely, the St. John's Courier. It was found in the paper, and therefore was added as a contributing factor to the article (relating to the jerseys). Don't just remove it because the colour scheme looks awful. It contributes to the article, leave it there. 207.216.163.163 07:48, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

That photo does nothing for the article. There is no mention anywhere of why it was put there, or that they plan to use it, or if it was a prototype. Yes, it has been said that the Canucks are looking to change their logo (see this Vancouver Sun article) with an announcment on August 1st. But the Canucks have yet to officialy announce this to anyone short of this article, which is highly speculative. Remember that Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. We can not speculate about what they might do with the logo. Thats why that image does not belong here. Kaiser matias 09:35, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
Beyond any factor, the fact of the matter is that the Canucks do not use a logo with that color scheme, nor have any announced plans to do so. I can't for the life of me see what a faked, invented color scheme adds to an article that's supposedly factual any more than would be the case if the newspaper came out with a doctored photo showing the Sedin brothers on the ice wearing string bikinis. Take it to a Canucks discussion forum. RGTraynor 10:16, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Brent Sopel: Calgary or Saskatoon?

Where exactly was Sopel born? The NHL site and canucks.com say that he is from Calgary. However, my Canucks Media Guide from 2004 states he is from Saskatoon, as do several other sources. Further backing up the Saskatoon claim is the fact that he played minor hockey in Saskatoon, and coincidental and less usefull is he played for the Blades while in the WHL. So can anyone actually confirm where exactly he is from? Kaiser matias 21:10, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Upcoming jerseys

I removed the blurb about the Johnny Canuck logo, which at this point seems to be pure speculation (see [3] or [4]). If someone has more definite info on it, they may revert but please state a source. Usonophile 16:18, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The same franchise ?

I'm probably going to get 'a raking' over this but, the idea that the Canucks of the NHL (a major league) is anyway, a continuation of the Canucks of the PCHL & WHL (both minor leagues) is laughable. It's differant for the Hurricanes, Avalanche, Oilers and Coyotes, who's orgins were from the WHA (a major league). Did the WHL Canucks retain the managment staff & most of their players when the (suppossed) transfer to the NHL, occured? GoodDay 20:32, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

As much the WHA teams did, come to that. Murray Hall, Ted Taylor, Marc Reaume, Len Lunde and George Gardner were on both the 69-70 WHL Canucks and the 70-71 NHL Canucks, and Orland Kurtenbach used to play for the WHL team. By contrast, Quebec had eight players in common, and Winnipeg seven. The management staff was the same (heck, the owner of the WHL team was the one who bought the NHL franchise). RGTraynor 21:26, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
The PCHL/WHL thing still make my eye twich (but my PoV, is in the minority). PCHL/WHL player inductions in the HHOF section, is also an eye twicher (but I won't go there, again). PS- should the PCHL & WHL Canucks captains, also be added? I'm guessing they should. GoodDay 21:37, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
Well ... the HHOF entries aren't any more invalid than for any other minor league team, and I suppose those minor league entries will balloon in the same way the NHL ones now have done. (Heck, never mind Grant Fuhr being a Calgary Flames HHOFer, he's a Nova Scotia Oilers' HHOFer too!) As far as captaincy lists, the same applies, unless one wants to hive off (defensibly) the WHL team into its own article. RGTraynor 21:42, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
That's a great idea, have a 'Vancouver Canucks (PCHL)' article & a 'Vancouver Canucks (WHL)' article (the same as there's a Winnipeg Jets, Hartford Whalers, Atlanta Flames etc). Perhaps someone (someday) will create such articles. Here's hoping. As for the suggestion of the Nova Scotia Oilers 'Grant Fuhr' introduction, don't give the inclustionists any ideas. GoodDay 21:55, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
Just FYI, PCHL = WHL; it's just as was done (and in the exact same way, come to that) forty years before, the league changed names. RGTraynor 04:10, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
I stand corrected, PCHL did rename itself the WHL. PS- see talk: Chicago Blackhawks and talk: Detroit Red Wings, concerning their Rosebuds & Aristocrats/Cougars orgins. GoodDay 18:19, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Founding date

I was just reading the article and noticed in the infobox it lists the Canucks as being founded in 1945. While that is true for the WHL team, it is not so for the NHL team. Further confusing the issue is in the opening paragraph it says they started in 1970. The infobox should have some mention as to the fact that they were not an NHL team until 1970, as its confusing, even to longtime followers of hockey. Any suggestions on what exactly to be done about it? Kaiser matias 00:50, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

As per the discussion above, which already goes into the issue at some length, it is exactly as accurate (and for similar reasons) as the Edmonton Oilers article stating that the Oilers were founded in 1972, which they were, despite the fact that the team was not then in the NHL. As far as whether people might be confused ... err, well, that's what the article is for; the subject is covered within it. RGTraynor 03:45, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
That's my fault for not reading the discussion above. Now I'm the one who looks foolish. Kaiser matias 07:32, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../v/a/n/Talk%7EVancouver_Canucks_b705.html"