Phaneuf To Sens

[bustaheims]

I find it a little disrespectful to the players to not assign a captain. It's like management is telling them their not good enough. All the talk around the team is about the management and building for the future. I imagine it's probably frustrating for anyone not in the long term plans. I guess it's motivation to play well enough to get moved to someone who wants you. I know being a hockey player is a good living regardless of the circumstance but having everyone talk around you would probably get old pretty quick.

I disagree. In fact, I'd say it's the opposite. It's a challenge to the players who aren't fighting for a contract. It's telling them that there's an opportunity for all of them to go out there and earn the right to have the C on the front of your jersey, and that it's not just being handed out for seniority or reputation.

 

[herman]

It's a challenge to the players who aren't fighting for a contract. It's telling them that there's an opportunity for all of them to go out there and earn the right to have the C on the front of your jersey, and that it's not just being handed out for seniority or reputation.

or dressing room music dominance.

 

[Peter D.]

I find it a little disrespectful to the players to not assign a captain. It's like management is telling them their not good enough. All the talk around the team is about the management and building for the future. I imagine it's probably frustrating for anyone not in the long term plans. I guess it's motivation to play well enough to get moved to someone who wants you. I know being a hockey player is a good living regardless of the circumstance but having everyone talk around you would probably get old pretty quick.

Armstrong
Keon
Sittler
Vaive
Ramage (ugh)
Clark
Gilmour
Sundin
Phaneuf (meh)
Komarov/JvR/Hunwick?!

No thank you.

 

[bustaheims]

Armstrong
Keon
Sittler
Vaive
Ramage (ugh)
Clark
Gilmour
Sundin
Phaneuf (meh)
Komarov/JvR/Hunwick?!

No thank you.

This. Of the guys on the roster, maybe Rielly one day, but I don't think he's ready yet. Everyone else on the roster might not be at Leafs in two years (in fact, 80% of the roster almost certainly won't be). Anyone named right now would basically be an interim captain, and that just doesn't feel right.

 

[Redleaf]

I find it a little disrespectful to the players to not assign a captain. It's like management is telling them their not good enough. All the talk around the team is about the management and building for the future. I imagine it's probably frustrating for anyone not in the long term plans. I guess it's motivation to play well enough to get moved to someone who wants you. I know being a hockey player is a good living regardless of the circumstance but having everyone talk around you would probably get old pretty quick.

Armstrong
Keon
Sittler
Vaive
Ramage (ugh)
Clark
Gilmour
Sundin
Phaneuf (meh)
Komarov/JvR/Hunwick?!

No thank you.

Unfortunately, regardless of the fact that we probably won't have a hall of famer in our midst anytime soon, we still need to name a captain in the not-too-distant future.

 

[herman]

Unfortunately, regardless of the fact that we probably won't have a hall of famer in our midst anytime soon, we still need to name a captain in the not-too-distant future.

Why's that?

 

[Redleaf]

Unfortunately, regardless of the fact that we probably won't have a hall of famer in our midst anytime soon, we still need to name a captain in the not-too-distant future.

Why's that?

Teams have captains. Idk. Lol. Are you suggesting we go without one for years?

 

[maplesyrup]

Unfortunately, regardless of the fact that we probably won't have a hall of famer in our midst anytime soon, we still need to name a captain in the not-too-distant future.

Why's that?

Teams have captains. Idk. Lol. Are you suggesting we go without one for years?

If need be. Why not? It won't of course be that long but I have faith that these guys can (and will) recognize a suitable leader when one presents himself.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Teams have captains. Idk. Lol. Are you suggesting we go without one for years?

The Habs spent an entire season without one last season. I'm sure Babcock and Lou will readdress the situation this summer and during next seasons training camp, but if they don't feel like there's a suitable candidate they'll go with 3 alternates again. Naming a captain for the sake of having a captain is worse than not having one at all.

 

[herman]

Unfortunately, regardless of the fact that we probably won't have a hall of famer in our midst anytime soon, we still need to name a captain in the not-too-distant future.

Why's that?

Teams have captains. Idk. Lol. Are you suggesting we go without one for years?

Teams have also run with alternate captains for stretches (Edit: See CtB's example).

Every team will have a leadership group, regardless of the letter on the jersey, that team members turn to for mentorship and guidance.

We will appoint one in due time, when such a player demonstrates the qualities a team needs in a formal leader. There is no point in naming one this year for the points busta raised, and also because Lou already said so.

 

[bustaheims]

The Habs spent an entire season without one last season. I'm sure Babcock and Lou will readdress the situation this summer and during next seasons training camp, but if they don't feel like there's a suitable candidate they'll go with 3 alternates again. Naming a captain for the sake of having a captain is worse than not having one at all.

So did the Leafs in 08-09. There's no reason the team can't go a season or two without a captain if there isn't anyone on the roster who is A) qualified and B) expected to be part of the team for more than a couple seasons going forward.

 

[rdowdall]

So whose return was more disappointing/less than one would have expected -- Kessel or Phaneuf?  My vote goes to Kessel.

I wasn't really disappointed with either return really.  The Leafs got assets for both players.  Were they stellar foundations of a rebuild type of assets?  No.  However the players they were giving up weren't foundations of a franchise type of players.  I think the fact that those contracts are off the books and the Leafs are getting to the point where they have a clean slate to work with is the best part of this process. 

 

[CarltonTheBear]

From @3rdPeriodSuits, a list of AHL/borderline NHLers moved out in the past calender year:

 

[Heroic Shrimp]

Unfortunately, regardless of the fact that we probably won't have a hall of famer in our midst anytime soon, we still need to name a captain in the not-too-distant future.

Why's that?

Teams have captains. Idk. Lol. Are you suggesting we go without one for years?

Why not?  It's an important symbolic position.  There's some wide and reasonable consensus that Phaneuf shouldn't have been named captain those years ago.  And if people had an issue with Phaneuf as captain, God, who would they have been comfortable with as captain since 2010?  Lupul?  Bozak??  Kessel???  I mean, if there's no obvious candidate, don't screw up and name a guy just for the sake of it, which is what a lot of people felt about the Phaneuf captaincy.

 

[Redleaf]

I don't think anyone's arguing about them possibly going without a captain for a full season. It's beyond that where I have trouble believing someone won't be named.

 

[Highlander]

Forget Captain, we already have a Kepitan Komarov 

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Not having a captain is probably the best thing for this team, especially during the rebuilding phase. Someone joked about how Babcock should wear the C but that's basically what's going to happen. Instead of one player in the dressing room having to carry the weight of the team on his shoulders Babcock will end up doing most of the heavy lifting in that regard.

 

[Highlander]

All kidding aside it will be Captain Steven Stamkos come the fall.

 

[ZBBM]

Teams have captains. Idk. Lol. Are you suggesting we go without one for years?

The Habs spent an entire season without one last season. I'm sure Babcock and Lou will readdress the situation this summer and during next seasons training camp, but if they don't feel like there's a suitable candidate they'll go with 3 alternates again. Naming a captain for the sake of having a captain is worse than not having one at all.

Exactly.  If you want your storied franchise to be a storied franchise, you pick somebody who is going to have a long and productive tenure with the team.

 

[Redleaf]

Not having a captain is probably the best thing for this team, especially during the rebuilding phase. Someone joked about how Babcock should wear the C but that's basically what's going to happen. Instead of one player in the dressing room having to carry the weight of the team on his shoulders Babcock will end up doing most of the heavy lifting in that regard.

Well sure, but is anyone here really saying that, short of landing Stamkos, this team should possibly hold off for 3-4years until one of the youngsters shows enough skill and maturity, before naming a new captain of the Leafs? Because that would surely be breaking some new ground in the history of league.