So do you want Horvat to captain this team, or do you want to draft a generational player?

[tas]

A lot of people misunderstanding me. Maybe I wasn't clear enough. I'm only talking about generational talent. Your Crosbys, McDavids, Ovechkins, etc. If the Canucks win a lottery and draft a Dahlin or a Jack Hughes, that player will be destined for the C. 

 

As far as Brock goes, I already stated earlier in the year that he is giving/will give Bo a run for his money when it comes to the C. Listen to the year end media availabilities. Everybody was saying that the letters don't matter, you don't need a letter to lead, there are lots of leaders in the room, yada yada. Furthermore, look at this team's track record. They made a goalie captain because he was by far the team's best player. Henrik wasn't on anybody's radar until he broke out and won a Hart. Hell, people were clamoring for Kesler or Bieksa. How did that turn out?

 

Anyway, I expected this to spark more thoughtful discussion than it has. Feel free to observe keenly and see what happens if the Canucks DO get lucky in a draft lottery. We can bump the thread then. 

[tas]

10 hours ago, Master Mind said:

That's already happened with Brown, Marleau, and Thornton, and they've been fine since.

Which of those was a Canadian media market?

[bp79]

49 minutes ago, goalie13 said:

It also takes wisdom to know when a thread doesn't need to be created.

Oh for sure and like I said probably that was one of them I reacted like I did because it seems people sometimes are just a little too harsh. When I read a post that I disagree with I usually don't respond since I've been on the other end a few times myself.Unless it's an obvious troll, cough cough Guardian, and the minus button was still active. Well, then that's a whole other story. That being said meant no disrespect to you. Cheers

[alfstonker]

10 hours ago, Master Mind said:

That's already happened with Brown, Marleau, and Thornton, and they've been fine since.

Didn't it happen with Luongo?

[goalie13]

1 minute ago, bp79 said:

Oh for sure and like I said probably that was one of them I reacted like I did because it seems people sometimes are just a little too harsh. When I read a post that I disagree with I usually don't respond since I've been on the other end a few times myself.Unless it's an obvious troll, cough cough Guardian, and the minus button was still active. Well, then that's a whole other story. That being said meant no disrespect to you. Cheers

I hear you there.  It's just sometimes ridiculous things need to be called out.  I feel that all too often there are people that think every random thought they have requires a new thread.

[DollarAndADream]

Horvat being captain with another superstar on the team is completely fine.

 

I mean, $&!#...

 

New Jersey Captain: Andy Greene

Boston: Chara. Not to say Chara isn't generational, but this conversation sort of implies that now that guys like Pastrnak and Marchand are amazing, they should be C.

Blue Jackets: Nick Foligno

 

I mean, there's more guys than that. But saying Horvat maybe shouldn't be captain for an elite offensive talent is like saying Toews shouldn't be captain because of Patrick Kane.

 

[JM_]

52 minutes ago, tas said:

A lot of people misunderstanding me. Maybe I wasn't clear enough. I'm only talking about generational talent. Your Crosbys, McDavids, Ovechkins, etc. If the Canucks win a lottery and draft a Dahlin or a Jack Hughes, that player will be destined for the C. 

whenever I hear people say "the Crosbys" the "McDavids" etc., I think why are they talking about their parents?

 

but to your point - I would suggest that the idea of your generational talent having to be the C automatically is a mistake. I think you could make a case that McDavid was given the C too early, it didn't do them much good this year now did it?

 

We have no idea if Rasmus is a natural leader, he may not be. If somehow not getting the C meant the guy didn't want to play here or sign a massive contract then he's probably flaky. 

 

You can't fake leadership, and Dahin or whoever won't be a team leader in their draft +1 year anyway. 

 

[tas]

14 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

whenever I hear people say "the Crosbys" the "McDavids" etc., I think why are they talking about their parents?

 

but to your point - I would suggest that the idea of your generational talent having to be the C automatically is a mistake. I think you could make a case that McDavid was given the C too early, it didn't do them much good this year now did it?

 

We have no idea if Rasmus is a natural leader, he may not be. If somehow not getting the C meant the guy didn't want to play here or sign a massive contract then he's probably flaky. 

 

You can't fake leadership, and Dahin or whoever won't be a team leader in their draft +1 year anyway. 

 

and my point is that the correlation between leadership and the captaincy, especially in a canadian market, is negligible. I mean, you're obviously not going to go with someone who is actively a BAD leader, but the C is about being the face of the franchise these days. 

[Rush17]

It wouldn't take a generational talent to be better then Horvat. I agree with the sentiment about giving Bo the and C and the potential consequences of stripping him of it. The humiliation, shame, and team dynamics could be utterly shifted.

 

  If u take it from a skill guy and award it to a character guy to get you over the hump tho. That has respectability but ripping it off a lesser skilled character guy less so. A skilled player can accept losing the C if a more raw raw leader arrives who better unites a team.

 

I have been an avid suppporter of let's wait and see how our kids pan out.  Give some of our non NHL top prospects a chance to get in the league before awarding the C to the first glimpse of hope. Bo has represented the youth movement and fans are in love with him. Wait until the other kids arrive because they're maybe a better option.

 

Besides the C should go to the leader of the next core. We have 3-4 core players here right now. It would make more sense to name a C when more of the core arrives.  Pettersson, Juolevi, Dahlen, 2018 pick then there is Boeser only a year in. Let's give them a chance to setup that locker room culture before giving it to the older guy just because he has given us hope and a glimpse of the future.

 

Toss the C on an established veteran or give out all A's for the next year or two. We can probably have a better idea who would be best for that role in 2-3 years. Maybe 4 

[wildcam]

I  agree stupid post, I think they will go with guys wearing alternates next year and rotate those A's..

Great chance Bo will be captain one day soon.... Need a room full of leadership to support the real captain..

No rush to find the next captain, more important things to deal with...

 

[kloubek]

I don't really care who is captain as it pertains to their ability.  Our captain should be the best leader of the team, and the one most likely to stick around long term.

[JM_]

4 minutes ago, tas said:

and my point is that the correlation between leadership and the captaincy, especially in a canadian market, is negligible. I mean, you're obviously not going to go with someone who is actively a BAD leader, but the C is about being the face of the franchise these days. 

thats what Edmonton did, but that doesn't mean its a one-size fits all thing for every club moving forward. Bo appears to be a natural leader, and thats a better choice for team building which is what our management group has shown they will do. I doubt marketing will play into it for Linden. 

[Kevin Biestra]

Regardless of how it plays out for the captaincy, I want the generational player.  Nothing will improve this team's chances at a Cup anywhere close to adding such a player, and I only think Bo should be the captain if he is the best option.  If we have the next Crosby in the lineup, then surely Bo can handle the "insult" of wearing an A.

 

The idea of not hoping to add the future best player in the NHL just so Bo can have the C is absolutely ridiculous.

[Rush17]

Neither Nico Hiesher or Nolan Patrick the top 2 picks from last draft are generational players. Some in the hockey community feel we may of gotten the best player in that draft at #5 with Elias Pettersson.  

 

Elias still needs to prove himself at the NHL level but if we have one prospect who might have that potential it is indeed Elias Pettersson.

 

You don't smash a Swedish Elite League scoring 30+ record if your not something special. He carried his team Vaxjo in the regulation season with massive points and he's continuing to do heavy lifting in the post season including his unreal series game winner that propelled his team into the SHL championship.

 

We have a lot of talented character guys coming up. Donning Bo the leader of a team that isn't together yet just isn't fair to those players and it could hurt our future locker room.  Having a guy named captain who isn't the teams true leader only causes problems in the locker room. 

 

Let's get these kids to Vancouver and settled in. Once that locker room is in place the leader will naturally float to the top. Travis Green knows what a good leader like. So does Trevor and Jim.

 

To act like we have all the answers is just silly. 99% of us know very little of what professional hockey management, culture, and leadership is all about. If you think you know more then that shows us all where you stand.

[Rush17]

7 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

thats what Edmonton did, but that doesn't mean its a one-size fits all thing for every club moving forward. Bo appears to be a natural leader, and thats a better choice for team building which is what our management group has shown they will do. I doubt marketing will play into it for Linden. 

Edmonton rushed it. Toronto is doing it right. Edmonton put so much pressure on McDavid it really isn't fair. Suppose it's good for team Canada tho. Giving him this Burdon early so he can be an experienced leader who has faced adversity. 

 

But those are generational players and will be their teams best players even in their peak  Bo Horvat will not be our best player nor is he a generational talent.

[Rush17]

1 hour ago, alfstonker said:

Didn't it happen with Luongo?

Yes but he was a goalie.

 

Marileau was an older skilled player. San Jose had a very strong leadership core. We don't know what was going on behind the scenes. He might of taken a step back and others stood up. Replacing a skilled player like Marileau as captian is easier then a guy regarded as a high character guy.

 

Dustin Brown's production fell off a cliff and he was no longer leading his team via performance. Character only takes you so far. You need to lead by producing points as well.

 

Roberto seemed like a stop gap measure anyways. They waited until hank was like 30 to give him the C. Mats Sundin was a big factor in him getting it. He highly encouraged that selection because he is a former highly regarded captain himself. He saw potential in the twins to be the great leaders they became.

 

2 hours ago, goalie13 said:

It also takes wisdom to know when a thread doesn't need to be created.

It is a perfectly good thread to start. The short sighted homerism of Bo is out of control in this town.

[goalie13]

1 minute ago, Rush17 said:

It is a perfectly good thread to start. The short sighted homerism of Bo is out of control in this town.

If it was about Bo's ability to be captain that would be one thing.  It was the whole concept of not naming a captain just in case a better captain comes along that was the ridiculous part.

[captainhorvat]

Just have the C on Dahlins jersey when we go draft him...Horvat will present it to him at the podium.

[tas]

6 minutes ago, goalie13 said:

If it was about Bo's ability to be captain that would be one thing.  It was the whole concept of not naming a captain just in case a better captain comes along that was the ridiculous part.

It's a perfectly valid point; it's about commitment. If you give Bo the C, you're committing to him being the face of the franchise for the next 5-10 years. Making that commitment while the team is still rebuilding, whether deliberately or not, carries risk. The discussion was supposed to be about that risk vs. reward.

[goalie13]

2 minutes ago, tas said:

It's a perfectly valid point; it's about commitment. If you give Bo the C, you're committing to him being the face of the franchise for the next 5-10 years. Making that commitment while the team is still rebuilding, whether deliberately or not, carries risk. The discussion was supposed to be about that risk vs. reward.

I totally disagree.  How is it a risk?  Just because you select Horvat as your captain doesn't mean Pettersson or Dahlen or Gaudette or Dahlin or anyone else can't be alternate captain.  By all reports, these are guys of character and would be excellent parts of a leadership team.

 

Addtionally, just because someone is not wearing the C doesn't mean they cannot be the face of the franchise.  Pavel Bure comes to mind.

 

It doesn't have to be one or the other as your thread implies.