Does Bo have it in him to be a "Linden Type" Leader?

[JM_]

19 hours ago, EdgarM said:

If you want a Cup, he has to be that type of Captain. If you just want presidents Cups?...…….Well then that's another story.

when did Linden win a cup?

[Amebushi]

Lol Bo is nothing like Linden...plays against the best in the world, dominates in the face off for while our depth is constantly injured. Oh and scores huge goals when the game is on the line. Yeah I don’t care if he hits like Linden. Bo knows how to lead. Bo knows how to take matters into his own hands. Let him be captain his own way instead of trying to make him “like” someone else  

[PetterssonOrPeterson]

lol. It's funny how fans feel the need to equate Horvat and Linden.

Is it because they're both Canadian? Seriously what's with all the comparisons?

 

Linden was Linden and Bo is Bo.

 

He'll grown into being his own leader

[EdgarM]

On 11/23/2019 at 12:07 AM, BrockBoester said:

You're settin the bar pretty high by using Trevor Linden as the measuring stick, bro.

I think you are exactly right, I think I have set the bar too high. Linden and Bure were truly "one of a kinds" and I guess we may never see those type of players in our lifetime again. The playoffs is when we will see what this new core is made of. Thank you all for your input.

[smokes]

No, Linden was the better player period. Right now, Given everything Bo has done at his age and what Linden did at the same age, the comparison isn't even fair. Better stats and he was already the captain. If Bo can captain the Canucks to a Stanley cup then we can circle back to it. But as of right now, maybe the status of a Naslund.

Edited November 24, 2019 by smokes

[-DLC-]

Did you happen to notice who sealed the deal vs the Caps for us?

 

Hits aren't the (only) measure of the man...the ability to come through when it matters is huge.  Bo did that.  Again.

 

I've looked at this topic a few times now, as it seems to blur lines between:  "is Bo good enough as Captain" and "Linden was awesome as Captain" and "Hank was not".  Trying to tie former captains in with new ones isn't really relevant for me.  You see, part of being captain is being a leader moreso than a follower.  And I have no doubt that having Hank as a mentor is a huge advantage, despite you hinting it's wasn't.  He was an iron man...a team first well respected player in this league for an awfully long time.  He and his brother DID lead the team to President's Trophies and they led the league in scoring.  It's funny how some sweep all that under the rug because they didn't win the cup.  Many greats don't...it doesn't diminish the fact that they were great.  Namely, goaltending can make/break a cup run.  Injuries/suspensions and the ebbs and flows of things.  But sure, let's put a "fail" stamp on a Captain based on cup results (or lack thereof) ... Linden never won the cup either.  Love both of those former captains and feel no need to throw one under the bus to make a point about the other.  A lot had happened between TL and HS as captains...namely, "the incident" that really changed how teams could respond in heated battles.  There was a wariness to engage, physically, on the part of the team black marked...we didn't win that game because officials made sure we couldn't.  

 

Anyhow, felt the need to defend Hank because I caught the attempt to somehow tie Bo into Hank in a negative way.  When Bo kicks butt let's make sure we discredit that myth.

 

Quote

I know he is just starting out as a Captain but I am afraid he was mentored by a Captain who was nothing like Linden.

I'd say Hank and Linden had more in common than you understand.  Both super respected in the league because they played with class and dignity and both showed up through injury, illness...whatever.  Linden wasn't a fighter (either) and that's ok.  Battling, hard, on the boards when you're being targeted repeatedly also requires "toughness".  Taking repeated hard shots but staying out there with resilience is...showing toughness.  It doesn't have to be on full display in a manly man beatdown way.

 

I'd really like you to elaborate on this "nothing like" part.  

 

[Gurn]

1 hour ago, smokes said:

Better stats 

different times, different stats.

[EdgarM]

8 hours ago, debluvscanucks said:

Did you happen to notice who sealed the deal vs the Caps for us?

 

Hits aren't the (only) measure of the man...the ability to come through when it matters is huge.  Bo did that.  Again.

 

I've looked at this topic a few times now, as it seems to blur lines between:  "is Bo good enough as Captain" and "Linden was awesome as Captain" and "Hank was not".  Trying to tie former captains in with new ones isn't really relevant for me.  You see, part of being captain is being a leader moreso than a follower.  And I have no doubt that having Hank as a mentor is a huge advantage, despite you hinting it's wasn't.  He was an iron man...a team first well respected player in this league for an awfully long time.  He and his brother DID lead the team to President's Trophies and they led the league in scoring.  It's funny how some sweep all that under the rug because they didn't win the cup.  Many greats don't...it doesn't diminish the fact that they were great.  Namely, goaltending can make/break a cup run.  Injuries/suspensions and the ebbs and flows of things.  But sure, let's put a "fail" stamp on a Captain based on cup results (or lack thereof) ... Linden never won the cup either.  Love both of those former captains and feel no need to throw one under the bus to make a point about the other.  A lot had happened between TL and HS as captains...namely, "the incident" that really changed how teams could respond in heated battles.  There was a wariness to engage, physically, on the part of the team black marked...we didn't win that game because officials made sure we couldn't.  

 

Anyhow, felt the need to defend Hank because I caught the attempt to somehow tie Bo into Hank in a negative way.  When Bo kicks butt let's make sure we discredit that myth.

 

I'd say Hank and Linden had more in common than you understand.  Both super respected in the league because they played with class and dignity and both showed up through injury, illness...whatever.  Linden wasn't a fighter (either) and that's ok.  Battling, hard, on the boards when you're being targeted repeatedly also requires "toughness".  Taking repeated hard shots but staying out there with resilience is...showing toughness.  It doesn't have to be on full display in a manly man beatdown way.

 

I'd really like you to elaborate on this "nothing like" part.  

 

A few things Deb, First I am a big fan of Bo and he is the Captain of my favorite team. No need to try and defend him and tell me what I know what he is capable of. By the way, it was the first time he has scored in like 9 games or something? I seen him do the similar when he first received his Captaincy but its been awhile since then. I seen him fight too but that was quite awhile ago. I guess consistency is still being worked on.

No two players are alike and some are better then others. Looking at the last two times we went to the finals I seen two completely different teams and two different Captains lead these teams. There has been many discussions on this topic so I won't go into too much detail. The big difference? One was an underdog and the other was the favorite. The underdog overcame adversity and it was very easy to see that they did everything in their power to win and came pretty close. The favorite? Well they almost lost a few times in previous series that year and looked mentally fragile. If it wasn't for Burrows, we may have never have made it the finals in the first place. 

We all know what our heroes can do but we fail to identify they also had faults. Like in 2011 our PP went something like 3/32 in the finals. Hmmmm…...it was pretty lethal in that regular season. Why the difference? I know, everybody says it was because of injuries. Linden was able to exceed his point total in the playoffs which shows he thrived in tough situations not to mention what he did in game 7. Yes Linden was not traditionally a fighter but he never backed down and he always stood up for his line mates.

So, after watching almost every Canuck game for the past 30 years I have seen trends. The early 90's were hard working less talented teams. As the team got more talented, I seen the work ethic deteriorate. The team took nights off during the regular season and took the lesser teams lightly. This happened in the playoffs as well like the year the team was totally flat and the only player to go "Beast Mode" that year was Kessler. 

How much does the leadership dictate the play of the team? From what I have seen from our previous Captains, I think a lot.

Like as discussed before, the playoffs is where we will see the real story and that remains to be seen ,but, there should be some indication from a leaders "regular season" play to a degree.

The bottom line is that I would like to see our new core lead by a Captain who will give us the best chance at winning a cup. My opinion is that we would have won the cup in 2011 with a Captain like Linden. Make no mistake, Hank was a great player but I have not seen too many "gentlemanly" leaders win a cup. Yes there are exceptions to the rule but there is in any situation. The majority were "Warrior type" players in my opinion.

So like I indicated before , I am not trying to provoke controversy I am merely asking others opinions on our young Captain. I apologise if I got you on the defensive Deb that was not my intention. Like everyone else, I just want to see our team succeed and I am wondering if we now have all the tools to make that possible, including leadership. I guess we will see in the next couple of years.

[Viper007]

16 hours ago, EdgarM said:

A few things Deb, First I am a big fan of Bo and he is the Captain of my favorite team. No need to try and defend him and tell me what I know what he is capable of. By the way, it was the first time he has scored in like 9 games or something? I seen him do the similar when he first received his Captaincy but its been awhile since then. I seen him fight too but that was quite awhile ago. I guess consistency is still being worked on.

No two players are alike and some are better then others. Looking at the last two times we went to the finals I seen two completely different teams and two different Captains lead these teams. There has been many discussions on this topic so I won't go into too much detail. The big difference? One was an underdog and the other was the favorite. The underdog overcame adversity and it was very easy to see that they did everything in their power to win and came pretty close. The favorite? Well they almost lost a few times in previous series that year and looked mentally fragile. If it wasn't for Burrows, we may have never have made it the finals in the first place. 

We all know what our heroes can do but we fail to identify they also had faults. Like in 2011 our PP went something like 3/32 in the finals. Hmmmm…...it was pretty lethal in that regular season. Why the difference? I know, everybody says it was because of injuries. Linden was able to exceed his point total in the playoffs which shows he thrived in tough situations not to mention what he did in game 7. Yes Linden was not traditionally a fighter but he never backed down and he always stood up for his line mates.

So, after watching almost every Canuck game for the past 30 years I have seen trends. The early 90's were hard working less talented teams. As the team got more talented, I seen the work ethic deteriorate. The team took nights off during the regular season and took the lesser teams lightly. This happened in the playoffs as well like the year the team was totally flat and the only player to go "Beast Mode" that year was Kessler. 

How much does the leadership dictate the play of the team? From what I have seen from our previous Captains, I think a lot.

Like as discussed before, the playoffs is where we will see the real story and that remains to be seen ,but, there should be some indication from a leaders "regular season" play to a degree.

The bottom line is that I would like to see our new core lead by a Captain who will give us the best chance at winning a cup. My opinion is that we would have won the cup in 2011 with a Captain like Linden. Make no mistake, Hank was a great player but I have not seen too many "gentlemanly" leaders win a cup. Yes there are exceptions to the rule but there is in any situation. The majority were "Warrior type" players in my opinion.

So like I indicated before , I am not trying to provoke controversy I am merely asking others opinions on our young Captain. I apologise if I got you on the defensive Deb that was not my intention. Like everyone else, I just want to see our team succeed and I am wondering if we now have all the tools to make that possible, including leadership. I guess we will see in the next couple of years.

You can never compare the 2 captains unless they're in the exact same positions in the exact same time.  You criticize the 2011 Canucks for almost losing if it weren't for Burrows ... well the 94 Canucks wouldn't have made it if it weren't for Bure/McLean.  You compare Linden's stats to Hank's but fail to realize that Linden wasn't being checked by the #1 defense pairing.  Bure was the offensive focus for all the teams.  It's alot easier to increase production from somebody who's not expected to than somebody who's always expected to.  The PP didn't get it done, but it all came down to health in this series.  Losing Hamhuis was the worst defenseman to lose.  He was our #1 shutdown defenseman with Bieksa.  Everybody had to play harder defensive minutes with him gone.  If Boston loses Chara, do you think they win?  The Stanley Cup is awarded to the TEAM.  Not to any individual players.  It is the hardest trophy to win in professional sports.  You need alot of things to go your way to win it all.  Unfortunately in 2011, it didn't.  I remember both 94 and 2011 and will always remember the good times I had watching those series.  But the one thing I don't do is criticize the players for not trying or "leading" for this discussion.  Everybody leads in a different way.  Everybody responds differently to different ways of leading.  Some like the in your face/physicality, and others prefer the skill and class of another.  There isn't a perfect leader.  I just want you to stop harping on the Sedins because that is what you've become known for on these boards.  The Sedins basher.  You might want to try having different takes instead of almost always having takes that look negatively on the Sedins.

[EdgarM]

On 11/25/2019 at 1:05 PM, Viper007 said:

You can never compare the 2 captains unless they're in the exact same positions in the exact same time.  You criticize the 2011 Canucks for almost losing if it weren't for Burrows ... well the 94 Canucks wouldn't have made it if it weren't for Bure/McLean.  You compare Linden's stats to Hank's but fail to realize that Linden wasn't being checked by the #1 defense pairing.  Bure was the offensive focus for all the teams.  It's alot easier to increase production from somebody who's not expected to than somebody who's always expected to.  The PP didn't get it done, but it all came down to health in this series.  Losing Hamhuis was the worst defenseman to lose.  He was our #1 shutdown defenseman with Bieksa.  Everybody had to play harder defensive minutes with him gone.  If Boston loses Chara, do you think they win?  The Stanley Cup is awarded to the TEAM.  Not to any individual players.  It is the hardest trophy to win in professional sports.  You need alot of things to go your way to win it all.  Unfortunately in 2011, it didn't.  I remember both 94 and 2011 and will always remember the good times I had watching those series.  But the one thing I don't do is criticize the players for not trying or "leading" for this discussion.  Everybody leads in a different way.  Everybody responds differently to different ways of leading.  Some like the in your face/physicality, and others prefer the skill and class of another.  There isn't a perfect leader.  I just want you to stop harping on the Sedins because that is what you've become known for on these boards.  The Sedins basher.  You might want to try having different takes instead of almost always having takes that look negatively on the Sedins.

I guess after watching pretty much every game Bure and Linden played and the Sedins entire careers I guess I cannot form an opinion on said players.

I have said before how much I appreciate the unbelievable skills the Sedins possessed but some fans refuse to admit that they came with faults. The most defining moment in their careers came in 2011. They had a chance to become a couple of the greatest players to ever play the game. All the stars aligned and we were one of the most dominant Canuck teams ever. Did we play like that in the playoffs? We totally dominated in the regular season and our PP was lethal. We go into the playoffs and all of a sudden we are apprehensive, weak mentally and had a hard time with almost every series that year. Remember the Chicago series? Remember game 7? 

Last night was a perfect example of how uninspired this team sometimes plays. Why the inconsistency? Is it part of the leaderships fault? 

All I know is that when the Linden era team played they played a full 60 minutes and they always finished checks and never let their check go because they were too lazy. Odjick kept the opposition on their toes and no one took liberties as common as it is now. So you are right, it does take a TEAM to win.