Jump to content

"The Best Player in the World"


trevluk

Recommended Posts

I don't think Giroux is incompetent. I think that the GM and the owner are - let's face it, they're the ones giving it out.

I do evaluate Giroux "as captain" but also "as player."

"As player" he's been solid, if underwhleming this season. "As captain" we need more than that.

But, again, as you note, there was NO NEED to make Giroux the captain rightnow, thisseason, immediately. Just like there was NO NEED to force "future captain-for-life" Mike Richards into that position.

Seriously, put the C on Timonen and/or Briere instead of Richards at that point, and the last six years of Flyer history - and the very makeup of the roster - are, IMO, completely different.

It WASN'T Richards who led the team to the Finals. I think everyone acknowlegdes that. It was Pronger. IF Richards and Crater are accessory players instead of the "face of the franchise" I think their attitudes and public perception varies wildly from what it became.

There was also NO NEED to put the C on Lindros - except for the PR move of making their "franchise player" the team captain.

The team has given out the C more as a PR move than anything else. Lindros, Smith, Hatcher, Forsberg, Richards, Pronger. And, yes, now Giroux.

The only "good" move might have been Primeau, and THAT move might not have been necessary had they handled Lindros differently.

I'll give Giroux a "pass" for not having been captain before. For still learning what leading a team means.

I'll give a "fail" to the idiots that put him in that position.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@radoran

Sorry I disagree on Pronger "leading" the team to the finals that year. Richards had every bit as much to do with that run, as did Briere. Richards was not only 2nd in points on the team, well, you know what else he brought in that run. That is all. I agree with your points about the captaincy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"He needs to play better". Well no ****, they all do, last I saw he's a forward, does he need make better outlet passes to himself? or set a little screen for himself so he can skate the puck out of the zone? Maybe he can come back and support himself a little better vs the forecheck ...

As with the post addressed by Rodoran, and in reference to your quote, can you identify where I said Giroux sucked, or was a bust? In fact, I think i said, "Giroux will be fine."

I think anytime a player is playing below his potential, criticism is warranted. there are two real possibilities here... 1) giroux is a good player having a sub par season, 2) Giroux had a great season which is not the norm, and what we are seeing now is. I don't think its the latter, and therefore, criticism is warranted. I think he is trying to hard to make the perfect pass and is reluctant to shoot. He should be a little more selfish.

I am totally on board with Rad's point of view here, I won't be gettinng myslef all spun up over Giroux having a hat trick agaisnt the Islanders or becasue he sprawls out trying to keep the puck in the zone. As a fan, I expect him to be the best player on this team and the captain. I tune in to each game expecting to see the player that earned that position, not another reminder of it being the wrong decision. You cite Richards and make the point that he was compared to Clarke too soon, and unjustifiably so, and therefore you aer sensitive about it. By the same token I compare Giroux to Richards with the same sensitivity, worried that this team is going to run another promising star right out of town

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i think we're giving way too much weight to what the fans think about "the C." The PR behind it, the fans' reaction, what the beat writers and talking heads on t.v. say...none of that matters to the guys in the room.

I'm sure every player in the Flyers' locker room respects Giroux. Nobody thinks "maybe it was too soon." Maybe a couple guys feel they should've been given it instead, like Kimmo or Briere, maybe Talbot...whoever. But those little ripples of envy - if they actually exist and I doubt they do - are nothing compared to the respect Giroux has earned. When you get right down to it the "C" is not exactly a life-threatening burden - it's 90% honorary and 10% actual work.

So - "Does the captaincy hurt Giroux's game?" We can all speculate but I doubt even Giroux can tell you for sure one way or the other. It was a natural fit and while it would've been *nice* if the Flyers had waited a year...there was really no reason to wait. For a curse?

Everybody knows the only real curse in Philly is that goddamn statue. lol. Did they ever evict ol' Billy Penn from the top of that building or what? That particular superstition seems to have gone away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@CoachX

oh sure let Rad do all the heavy lifting for you :ph34r:

i would have preferred to see a different person named captain going back to Jason Smith, Timonen or Briere were both better choices at the time and would have pushed back the need to name Richards; as for Giroux's situation there's Timonen's age group and then there's a bunch of kids as far as the roster goes, i don't know what the right move was after Pronger got hurt, I don't think Hartnell's a good choice, Both Briere and Timo were coming towards the end of their contracts, there was sort of no one, which maybe wouldn't have been a bad thing ? jody shelly he's good in the room.

Edit: I forgot about Talbot, maybe he'd be a good one, sort of a wendel clark type, but there is a big gap twixt the aging vets and 2nd year guys with not many guys in the mid range of 26-31...

i see effort from 28 i see him leaving everything on the ice at the end of the game, i watch about half the games ,that's what i want from the leader of the team, the results will come if he continues with his effort.

your mileage may vary radoran all rights reserved

Edited by mojo1917
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@radoran

Sorry I disagree on Pronger "leading" the team to the finals that year. Richards had every bit as much to do with that run, as did Briere. Richards was not only 2nd in points on the team, well, you know what else he brought in that run. That is all. I agree with your points about the captaincy.

I understand your point, and I think it's valid. But while Richards and Briere had very much to do with that run in terms of on-ice play, I think Rad may be talking more about team/locker room/etc. leadership. It's a point that's nearly impossible to "prove," but I do think Pronger had as much or more to do with that as anyone else.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look at Hartnell last year, he had a career year playing with G. That was not an accident, G was able to find him with a lot of nice set up's...

Point well taken, although I will say that I am not 100% sold on the theory that Hartnell had a career year solely thanks to Giroux (I know you didn't say that, but some people did). There is no doubt Giroux played a big role in that, but the last year was a special year for the Flyers in many ways. Many players elevated their play, which is why the team had a relative success and overachieved... at least I think they overachieved. I am sure Giroux played a certain role in Hartnell's success, but I also think Hartnell did it mainly because he finally decided to play up to his ability. He was getting open more than I’ve ever seen him do that before. He was more aggressive digging the puck out of tight spots, and just looked more determined in general.

I am not bashing Giroux at all. I think he is a fantastic player and have many more years of a very amazing career ahead of him. He is more than capable of creating his own opportunities, but I just don’t see enough evidence SO FAR in his game to convince me he consistently makes other players around him better. And it’s not a jab at Giroux at all. He most certainly contributes in his own right; I just don’t think he is in a Crosby category yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Point well taken, although I will say that I am not 100% sold on the theory that Hartnell had a career year solely thanks to Giroux (I know you didn't say that, but some people did). There is no doubt Giroux played a big role in that, but the last year was a special year for the Flyers in many ways.

There is also the possibility that Jagr also helped Hartnell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's the same old same old thinking with the Flyers. Captain should not (necessarily) equal your best player.

If Giroux has never been captain at any level, what on earth possibly made the FO think that he could be a good one at the NHL level? He clearly has skills on the ice, and he's clearly dedicated to his job. If you've ever seen his off-season regimen, it's pretty impressive. He wants to get better at what he does. That's great.

So, why does he NEED to be captain? I've said it before on this board, and it was a pretty unpopular opinion, but I think he was the wrong choice for captain. He might never be a good captain, or he might be an awesome one... but based on the available evidence, he was a poor choice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@canoli

Curse, no curse...that's a load of chicken hooey to me. However, at all levels of competition there is the reality that mental pressure, specifically self imposed, can affect your level of play.

My concern with Giroux, and again with Richards, was the responsibility, perceived or otherwise, effected thier emotional and mental game, causing their on ice play to suffer. Maturity plays a big part in things. So does comfort. Why do you thinnk their are so many superstitions associated with players. They don't shave, they need a certain number, they eat the same food.. etc. I'm sure players are well aware of the history of the Flyers and the predecessors who played there. Add in fan base and media pressure and it can really impact a person

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@radoran

Sorry I disagree on Pronger "leading" the team to the finals that year. Richards had every bit as much to do with that run, as did Briere. Richards was not only 2nd in points on the team, well, you know what else he brought in that run. That is all. I agree with your points about the captaincy.

No need to be sorry about it, just disagree :)

I think Richards was certainly involved in the run, but most oberservers (and posters on this board) attribute the "captain" leadership on that team to Pronger.

You don't seriously think Pronger was "following" Richards, do you?

I understand your point, and I think it's valid. But while Richards and Briere had very much to do with that run in terms of on-ice play, I think Rad may be talking more about team/locker room/etc. leadership. It's a point that's nearly impossible to "prove," but I do think Pronger had as much or more to do with that as anyone else.

I think this is some of it. I think also that Pronger became the bedrock that they could build upon - the thing that made having a Boucher/Leighton goalie tandem actually GET to the Finals.

I think the team blowing the whole thing up and handing the C to Pronger sort of backs up the hypothesis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@radoran

I don't think Pronger was following Richards. And I sure as heck don't think Richards was following Pronger. I think they were both leading the team. And Brieres timely goals also helped to inspire that run as well.

Well there's a recipie for continued success...

And then they chose to go with the 35+ year old hired gun over their own picked and groomed "captain of the future, next Bobby Clarke."

Certainly at least a questionable decision on their part.

And more grist for the mill over who was leading what, where and when.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@CoachX

I hear ya - there are tons of player superstitions around the NHL - and every other L too. All I'm saying is "the C" is not that big a deal. It's just not. Sure there's pressure associated with it but it's a fraction more than you have without it that's all.

It gets magnified in the papers, on t.v. and on fan websites, sometimes beyond all proportion to what it really is - a letter on a guy's chest that says he gets to talk to the refs during the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@CoachX

I hear ya - there are tons of player superstitions around the NHL - and every other L too. All I'm saying is "the C" is not that big a deal. It's just not. Sure there's pressure associated with it but it's a fraction more than you have without it that's all.

It gets magnified in the papers, on t.v. and on fan websites, sometimes beyond all proportion to what it really is - a letter on a guy's chest that says he gets to talk to the refs during the game.

I do think that in the best circumstances, a captain is a vital, focal point of a team.

"Recently," I think Brind'Amour in Carolina. Sakic in Colorado. Messier in New York. Yzerman forever in Detroit. Heck, Andreychuk in Tampa. And, yes, Primeau in Philadelphia (after he learned that "quitting" isn't an option in the NHL).

I think the captaincy has the potential to have a game-chaning impact.

But, for most guys, yeah - it just means they get to talk to the refs during a game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@canoli

Curse, no curse...that's a load of chicken hooey to me. However, at all levels of competition there is the reality that mental pressure, specifically self imposed, can affect your level of play.

My concern with Giroux, and again with Richards, was the responsibility, perceived or otherwise, effected thier emotional and mental game, causing their on ice play to suffer. Maturity plays a big part in things. So does comfort. Why do you thinnk their are so many superstitions associated with players. They don't shave, they need a certain number, they eat the same food.. etc. I'm sure players are well aware of the history of the Flyers and the predecessors who played there. Add in fan base and media pressure and it can really impact a person

You see the same thing in baseball. A switch from shortstop to third base or from first base to outfield suddenly effects performance at the plate. The field and the plate have no physical correlation yet you see this happen quite a bit. Why? Because emotionally/mentally they are tight or are having a crisis of confidence or whatever. The same thing with suddenly being saddled with a letter on the sweater. No real physical correlation. You still have to pass and shoot and forecheck or whatever, but somehow the mental/emotion seeps in and it does affect a player.

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.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

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.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...