Canucks' struggles are a reminder it's not easy to build a contender
As the Vancouver Canucks meander (struggle? stumble?) their way to the end of the regular season, the Stanley Cup Playoffs now visible on the horizon, let us cast our gaze back, first to consider a president's pre-season message, then much further back, to consider how a contender truly is built.
At the all-star break, the Canucks were tied for first in the NHL by points percentage.
Certainly there were signs that they probably weren't going to remain atop the league standings, but they were also coming off a remarkable month. They lost just three times — only once in regulation — in January.
They'd lost just 11 times in regulation in 49 games to that point.
Before Wednesday's game in Arizona, the Canucks have lost 10 times in regulation in the 26 games since the all-star break.
That's just a .558 points percentage clip. If the Canucks had played the whole season at such a clip, they'd just be holding on to 16th overall in the NHL.
In other words, a maybe as playoff qualifiers.
Remember what Jim Rutherford said on the eve of the season? They're a playoff team if everything goes right.
“Your goalie has to be good. Your specialty teams have to be good. You can't get into a lot of injuries. OK, now I'm not saying if one of those things go wrong, we can't still make it. Because we have some impact players that can win games by themselves,” he said in September.
The team's powerful first half built up such a cushion, they've been able to weather their second-half slump well enough, and though they have fallen out of the top five in the league in points percentage, they remain atop the Pacific Division, if only just.
That they're even at this point mustn't be forgotten. Two years ago, they came up short of the playoffs following a chaotic season, one that started terribly and saw dramatic management changes midseason.
There was a lot of work to be done. Last season also started terribly and the team was once again adrift midseason. But since Rick Tocchet was hired as coach at the end of January 2023, the trajectory has been up.
Right now it's stalled, but the overall progress mustn't be forgotten.
Think, then, of the best Canucks teams of the past and how they needed time to fully find their feet as contenders.
Think of the Canucks in 2009, less than a year into Mike Gillis' term as general manager.
They were a strong playoff team, but were bounced in the second round by the Chicago Blackhawks. It was a similar story a year later. Both seasons saw big tweaks made to the roster. Some moves proved to be dead ends, like signing Mats Sundin or trading for Keith Ballard, but others on the way to the 2011 Stanley Cup Final proved to be keepers, like elevating Alex Burrows to the Sedins' line or trading for Christian Ehrhoff or signing Manny Malhotra or Dan Hamhuis.
It takes a few attempts to iron out your lineup. This season's Canucks are still in the ironing out process.
Or think of the 2003 Canucks, who through 41 games were the second-best team in the NHL by points percentage but by the end of the season had fallen to seventh and had also lost the division title. (And even so, their 104 points at the end of the season was a club record at the time.)
“We choked,” Markus Naslund admitted to the assembled fans after the final game of the season. But they'd do better in the playoffs, he vowed. And they did, at one point seeing a yellow brick road laid before them to march to the Stanley Cup Final, no matter whether Dan Cloutier was their goalie or not. But then it all fell apart in the second round to the Minnesota Wild.
Winning isn't easy, but it requires consistency and those Canucks in the end failed in that. These Canucks, obviously, are still finding their way to consistency.
Or you can look further back, to the two seasons before the Canucks made the Stanley Cup Final in 1994. The Canucks won their division in 1992 and 1993. They had more points both seasons than 1994.
But both those teams stumbled in the playoffs, unable to find another gear despite their scoring prowess, losing in the second round each year.
The consensus about why those two teams fell flat in the playoffs, while the '94 squad found its way at the right moment, is an ephemeral one: they had to “learn how to win.”
Of course, Pat Quinn continued to tweak with his lineup, finding a way to add Jeff Brown, Bret Hedican and Nathan Lafayette after Petr Nedved refused to re-sign.
But more than anything, the Canucks found a rhythm in those playoffs that Geoff Courtnall recently said was born out of the team's failures the previous two playoffs.
“Winners think they can, and they do,” he said. “Teams that have success in the playoffs always have contributions from unexpected players. I've always said the playoffs is a much more intense game and young players who gain confidence from training camp to the end of the season can be huge factors.”
These Canucks know they'll have to learn those lessons. Obviously they hope they learn those ones quickly, with minimal pain.