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

[Down by the River]

42 minutes ago, tas said:

How many current generational players are NOT the captain of their team (if they're older than, say, 21)? Not just franchise players or best players on the team, but generational. 

Here's a guy that thinks a generational player is drafted every year. I don't think you understand what the term means. 

[tas]

12 minutes ago, HerrDrFunk said:

Oh! Okay, so you're just choosing to redefine the meaning of words. That makes a lot more sense now; though I don't blame you entirely, the word "generational" gets thrown around much too frequently now when people actually mean "franchise" or "elite".

 

No, a generational player is just that, a player who comes along once in a generation. There are three generational players in the NHL now: Crosby, Ovechkin and McDavid. The fact that Crosby and Ovi both came into the league at the same time was a miracle unto itself. 

Define it more or less how you want. "The best of the best" during a chunk of time. Some people are more generous than others. It doesn't really matter. 

[Rush17]

1 hour 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.

Someone who gets some of it. Not to mention the impact on the room long term making Bo your leader before the next core arrives.  At least let the kids get their feet wet before throwing it to Bo. He is an exciting player and represents the changing of the guard. But he will not be the sole face of this franchise. If he deserves it in a few years I'm all on board. But it's to early for that.

[Rush17]

1 hour ago, goalie13 said:

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.

I am starting to question why I even bother giving your comments a reponse. 

[Down by the River]

13 hours ago, goalie13 said:

This is ridiculous, even by CDC standards.

 

You can name Horvat captain and still be able to draft the BPA.  I am confident that Benning will draft the type of character player that would be honoured to be an alternate captain.

 

Besides, 'Generational Talent' is a term that is WAY overused.

Thank you. Do people not understand that for a player to be a generational talent, they need to distinguish themselves from all other players in about the span of a decade? You really can't have 4-5 generational players at any one point in time. Right now the league has Crosby and McDavid. Those are generational talents. Arguments could be made for Ovechkin and, in time, maybe Matthews. 

 

[HerrDrFunk]

Just now, tas said:

Define it more or less how you want. "The best of the best" during a chunk of time. Some people are more generous than others. It doesn't really matter. 

Hey, it's cool. You do you. Get drafted first overall? You're a generational player. Lead a team in scoring? Generational player. 

[GB5]

I feel like I am wasting my time to respond to this thread but the captain is the guy who best represents the team and is a leader in the dressing room as well as on the ice.

 

Where is it written that the player who makes the most money or who scores the most points is the captain? 

 

[tas]

Just now, HerrDrFunk said:

Hey, it's cool. You do you. Get drafted first overall? You're a generational player. Lead a team in scoring? Generational player. 

You're making a lot of ridiculous leaps in my logic, there. 

[Rush17]

2 hours ago, DollarAndADream said:

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.

 

Chara is a veteran like the twins. He has lead his team in phyiscal fitness testing year in and year out. He has been a vocal leader in their room for a long time. He is the best big d man I can ever recall. He was and still is one of the best d men in the league. I think we should show some respect even if we hate on the Bruins. 

[HerrDrFunk]

Just now, Down by the River said:

Thank you. Do people not understand that for a player to be a generational talent, they need to distinguish themselves from all other players in about the span of a decade? You really can't have 4-5 generational players at any one point in time. Right now the league has Crosby and McDavid. Those are generational talents. Arguments could be made for Ovechkin and, in time, maybe Matthews. 

 

I think Ovi is borderline but I have to include him based on his seven Richard trophies. 

[HerrDrFunk]

3 minutes ago, tas said:

You're making a lot of ridiculous leaps in my logic, there. 

You're the one trying to redefine what words mean. We might as well just slap the generational label on any player who has a few good seasons by your logic.

[Darius]

In my mind there have been 4 generational players since the 80s...Gretzky, Lemieux, Crosby and maybe McDavid.

 

[Rush17]

2 hours ago, DollarAndADream said:

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.

Toews is Nick named captain Canada. He is one of the finest leaders in the last 20 years. He will be regarded as high as mark Messier one day in all likelihood.  He is far from void of skill.  Look at his contributions. 

 

I once though Bo might have Toews level impact on our club but he just isn't well rounded and skilled enough. Toews career had been far more impressive at this age this Bo. You can argue teammates but let's face it Chicago didn't have the twins there providing that offensive contribution. 

 

[goalie13]

7 minutes ago, Rush17 said:

You call it ridiculous yet all the smart people who run this team seem to agree. So if anything it's you that's ridiculous for thinking you know better then actual hockey executives.  

Not at all.  I normally defer to what actual hockey executives are thinking.  Except Mike Milbury, I could never figure that guy out.  In fact, I often use that same argument against crazy ideas.  However, in this case, unless I missed an announcement somewhere, neither Benning nor Linden have declared any strategy on the captainship going forward.

[bp79]

23 minutes ago, higgyfan said:

If you look at the list of team captains, you will find that most of them are closer to 30 than 20.  Many of the rebuilding teams have opted to go without a captain for the time being.

 

I think that Bo will be the Canucks captain at some point and he is certainly being groomed for it (I have noticed that he has often been the spokesman during the last few weeks of the season..  He's very well spoken with the press and is the type of player everyone loves.  As each year goes by, he seems to be even more cut out of the same cloth as Linden. Heart, integrity, commitment, tenacity, selflessness, confidence and respect from teammates.  These qualities do not necessarily belong to the best player on the team.

 

In Vancouver, there is a lot of off-ice pressure coming from (mostly) the press, but many fans as well.  Bo has a lot of games under his belt and has already been with the team longer than any other player under 25yrs.  He knows what to expect from the environment.  They might wait for a year or two and go with the 'no captain' situation and have the 'A' group lead by committee, but I do believe Bo is their guy.

I agree with everything you said. Except the fact that they will go without a captain next year. Edler is the perfect choice to carry the torch while Bo earns his stripes. Maybe im in the minority but until you have won a few rounds of playoff hockey you haven't been tested enough. Now obviously he is going to be a beast when we make a run next year (positive thinking)but until that happens he hasn't proved enough to be the leader of this team. Edler is the guy for the time being. He has been a warrior for us. Literally plays in pain every single game and has never once complained. Just quietly goes out and logs 30 minutes and refuses to play anywhere else. As of right now, he is our leader Bo is 23 When Edler hangs them up Bo will be in his prime leading this team like old 16 did. Why is everyone so quick to put the C on him? Look how long Hank waited. We all know Bo will be a playoff leader and beast, but he still has to go out and earn it. No free passes THis isn't Oil country.

[riffraff]

2 hours 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. 

Only if you have the mentality of the oilers organization which is not something to model.

[goalie13]

10 minutes ago, Rush17 said:

I am starting to question why I even bother giving your comments a reponse. 

I thought it was because you enjoyed a spirited discussion.

 

I think the original idea was out to lunch, you think I'm out to lunch.  If everyone agreed it would be a very boring discussion board.

[VanGnome]

2 minutes ago, bp79 said:

I recall at the time a lot of people were a little surprised at the decision. admittedly I am not the most tech savvy person so I would have a hard time digging up the article if it even is still floating around.awhile back after he was named Captain he admitted in an interview that he felt a lot of added pressure and it affected his game. He obviously worked through it but 19 is just too young Not named sid lol.  Mcdavid is the perfect example. So he gets a crapload of points big deal. That is not what makes a captain. Listening to Conner in the scrums makes me think what a zebra must feel like right before it bites the dust.

 

Now in no way am I saying that Bo would be like that, not even close. What I think is that you have to earn it and so far and it's not his fault but we have not gone to war as a team and guys like Edler  Tanev etc have. Is Bo our future Captain? If I was a betting man based on his character id say hell yea. Is he our leader right now after 4 seasons and 4 playoff games not yet. And that is no jab at him. I just think guys need to be proven in battle before they get named Captain. Don't most people compare hockey to war? well if so you have to earn your rank. A couple of nice gruelling playoff series starting next year I hope lol. Should have him well on his way  Cheers. Ps Tanev would be a good choice if he wasn't so damn injury prone

 

IMO, Tanev, Edler are not candidates for the C. They are the last two, now with the Sedins' departures as remaining Canucks from the 2011 run, and on the downward trend of the bell curve representing their peak play.

IMO given that the Canucks have a fresh, young new identity, it's befitting to have a young new captain.

Smyl: Captain at 24 years
Linden: Captain at 21 years

Naslund: Captain at 27 years

Luongo: Captain at 29 years
Sedin: Captain at 30 years

The last 17 years we've trended towards older and older captains because we went through two cycles of being good with very little down time of being a bad team, 3 years from 97-99 when Messier was here, and then we started the up trend again once Naslund became captain, and rolled right on into Henriks captaincy as a decent-good team then became a great team for a short time.the last 4 years has been a gut shot.

We need to go back to a young captain and have the team grow around him, him being Horvat. It's almost better if your captain is not your highest skilled player or best player on the team, and not every player is cut out to be a captain. It's really about the person and how comfortable they are not only in the media and in public, but also in keeping guys accountable on the team.

Horvat every single off season has put in the dedication and hardwork to not just improve, but significantly improve. That's the kind of quiet lead by example drive we need to have set for the new players coming onto the team.

 

[Rush17]

6 minutes ago, goalie13 said:

Not at all.  I normally defer to what actual hockey executives are thinking.  Except Mike Milbury, I could never figure that guy out.  In fact, I often use that same argument against crazy ideas.  However, in this case, unless I missed an announcement somewhere, neither Benning nor Linden have declared any strategy on the captainship going forward.

If you watch the presser and media interviews of Linden and Benning. They pretty much say they would like to go with A's next season. Unless a guy in the leadership group steps up. The twins were pressed who they felt would be a good captain they listed off the same names as management. Sutter, Edler, Gagner, and Del Zotto were all their go too. They prefer a group approach it was emphasized by Linden like 3 times in a single interview.

 

The plan isnt to give it to Bo quite yet. If he earns it when there are more kids then I'm all for it. I'm sure Jim would like some of his draft picks have an opportunity even tho that won't be the main reason for it. 

 

I suspect it will be all A's unless they rotate the C or give it to Sutter or Edler. So in a way they have given their strategy but they haven't named what the exact plan is. Green says we have all season to figure it out. So we have no need to rush it. But for the record. 

 

They have said on numerous occasions and multiple times it will likely be a group effort of veterans in the 26-32 age range.  It is a lot for Bo to handle if he and Boeser are expected to carry the top line, produce, well handling the Vancouver media. If this was flordia or Anahiem I would have less concern about that part of it. Still feel they should get more core guys together first. Besides veteran leadership has been a tradition over the past few captains. 

[Baggins]

Going by the thread title, if I have a choice between Horvat getting the C or drafting a generational talent, I say screw Horvat. However I don't see how giving the C to somebody else will somehow guarantee drafting a generational talent. Unless of course the league actually does fix the lottery and Bettman has a hate on for Horvat for some inexplicable reason.