Jump to content

Habs name four alternate captains


JoeLassister

Recommended Posts

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Stogey24

You wouldn't think it would be that difficult to pick someone and whoever is deciding must think it is a bigger deal than should be. Lame

with the size of the spot light in Montreal its a pretty big deal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great strategy by MTL mgmt to spread the captaincy to the 4 chosen. They'll be able to spread the media work between them.

It won't put additional pressure on PAC and SUB.

What is a Captain with players making salaries between 1M to 9M, nothing except a figurehead

It is their job to perform in order to get paid more in the future. A Captain in the past had a larger role, but now, let's get real, with the salaries that these athletes make, no pep talk is going to make a difference.

"We're playing the big bad Bruins" speech isn't going to affect a player like Sekac you hasn't played against them...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You wouldn't think it would be that difficult to pick someone and whoever is deciding must think it is a bigger deal than should be. Lame

Doing this suggests that long-term, the job is likely bound for one of Subban or Pacioretty. Neither of them have worn an 'A' full-time yet so this is a way to get their feet wet so to speak in that regard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What the heck, can't decide on a Captain, then the solution is easy Captain by committee. For this team at this time, this is probably a good idea, they have lots of young leaders and this is a way to break them in to what being a captain means. Hopefully this does not become a competition between them trying to prove they are the best "captain". I think by default Markov is the captain of the captains.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doing this suggests that long-term, the job is likely bound for one of Subban or Pacioretty. Neither of them have worn an 'A' full-time yet so this is a way to get their feet wet so to speak in that regard.

Plekanec hardly wore an A as well. I think him finally getting a regular letter is to see how he responds in the next two seasons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Plekanec hardly wore an A as well. I think him finally getting a regular letter is to see how he responds in the next two seasons.

He has worn an A the last five years at different times (often as the alternate to one of the other alternates) so he does have a bit of experience with one in short spurts. I don't think it will affect him too much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the decision, what it does in the meantime to dispel any distraction to the team, or what the media in MTL would make out of the captain issue. I think it's another good move by Bergevin & company, this is a progressive and outside the box decision, and bodes well for team chemistry, and the future captain being trained for long term. Another move by management, that keeps my confidence high in Bergevin running the show in Habland....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, so refute my point. Can you name one Stanley Cup contender that's had four guys with A's because none are capable (in the mind's of management) of being Captain?

None, though the Rangers just made the Stanley Cup finals after trading away their captain at the trade deadline. We made the Eastern Conference final without a captain in 2010. In other words, it's an anomaly that it has never happened. The C is ceremonial and nothing else.

A black hockey player has never been captain and hoisted the Stanley Cup, I guess we should just go with "how things were" and not name Subban captain? That's your logic here. "I don't remember seeing it happen so it should never be done."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A black hockey player has never been captain and hoisted the Stanley Cup, I guess we should just go with "how things were" and not name Subban captain? That's your logic here. "I don't remember seeing it happen so it should never be done."

That's a straw man argument.

I prefer to think for myself. What you're saying is that although:

A) Management doesn't feel there is a strong enough candidate for the C

B) This somehow means we have a great leadership core? Or that leadership is possible through committee? (It's not. Look no further than the Carbonneau-Chelios disaster for clarification).

I don't think the sky is falling, or that this is hugely impacts MTL chances next year, but if you find any positives in not naming a Captain you are either deluded, or a relative of MB.

The "real scoop" is that management needs to see what Sekac can do out there before they waste their time naming someone else the Captain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The team was fine with going without a captain in 2009-2010. They made the Eastern Conference Finals.

The New York Rangers traded their captain last season. They made it to the Stanley Cup Finals.

So tell me. Would the Rangers have won the Cup last season had they named McDonaugh captain right after Callahan was dealt? No?

Then maybe, just maybe, the C is just ceremonial and leadership comes from a core, much like how one player can't carry a whole team to a championship and one European free agency signing isn't as big of a deal as you keep making it to be.

The Columbus Blue Jackets are doing better than ever without naming a captain since Nash left.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tell Chris Pronger the C is cermonial.

Or Mark Messier.

Sekac is just going to rip. And the dozen cooks in the kitchen are going to make a mighty stew in 2014-2015.

The Rangers got spanked. And so did the Habs. Bringing up two teams that made runs and came up well short of the goal does nothing to suggest that the Captaincy isn't important.

There's no positive to not naming a Captain. At best, it suggests that the player they want isn't ready, or they have someone like Markov or Plek that doesn't want to take the reins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Stogey24

Tell Chris Pronger the C is cermonial.

Or Mark Messier.

Sekac is just going to rip. And the dozen cooks in the kitchen are going to make a mighty stew in 2014-2015.

The Rangers got spanked. And so did the Habs. Bringing up two teams that made runs and came up well short of the goal does nothing to suggest that the Captaincy isn't important.

There's no positive to not naming a Captain. At best, it suggests that the player they want isn't ready, or they have someone like Markov or Plek that doesn't want to take the reins.

Markov clearly still doesn't want it, can almost guarantee it was his for the taking if he did and Plek probably isn't in the future plans for this team if Galchenyuk steps up....
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Markov clearly still doesn't want it because I'm sure it was his for the taking and I have a feeling Plek isn't in the future plans for this team if Galchenyuk steps up

I'd say that Galchenyuk will not determine Plek's future with the team. Lars Eller will.

Galchenyuk is taking over top line C in the future along with top line offensive wingers. Not Plekanec's spot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...