Jump to content

Captaincy stripped from Thornton


hf101

Recommended Posts

Sources are reporting that the the Sharks have removed the "C" from Thornton.  The team will enter training camp with No "C" or "A's", as the leadership roles are all up for grabs.

 

 

I actually kind of like this strategy, I think every team should vote every year during training camp.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obviously the first of many pokes in the eye to get him to want to leave

 

 Interesting take. I'm anxiously awaiting "our" Joe's take on this. I don't think you can totally fault Joe for that collapse, not even close.....BUT....in a results based league, his leadership has provided a big fat goose-egg. I don't think that's an indictment of Joe, just a statement of fact. I think they just want to go in a different direction with the leadership....give Logan the reigns and make way for the youth kinda thing. A real honest changing of the guard. This will be a blow to Joe's ego, but I do believe he's the consummate professional, he can still make this work in San Jose.....question is, does San Jose still want it to work?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sources are reporting that the the Sharks have removed the "C" from Thornton.  The team will enter training camp with No "C" or "A's", as the leadership roles are all up for grabs.

 

 

I actually kind of like this strategy, I think every team should vote every year during training camp.

 

Well, in theory, this is a good idea, and I am sure teams still go through the process of figuring out who best to give the official leadership roles to, but there IS something to be said for consistency, you know, when there is NO QUESTION, as to who your on-ice and locker room leader is.

 

Things like that simply give a confidence to a team that you just cannot manufacture in any other way.

 

For instance, right now, in Tampa Bay, with VLC gone, MSL gone, the team is unquestionably Steven Stamkos' team.

He has accepted the role, seems to revel in it, and says and does things day in, day out that say he wants to be the guy who sets the tone for the team on and off the ice.

There is no voting on Stamkos because everyone feels he is the right guy for the role, will look to him to perform and feel every bit confident that as Stamkos goes, so do the fortunes of the team for the most part.

 

Granted, in some cases, in some locker rooms, perhaps a "kick in the pants" is needed....and I suspect that may be the case in San Jose.

That team was supposed to have brought at least ONE Stanley Cup with the group of players, headed by guys like Thornton and Marleau, to the organization by now.

 

And they may still yet with those two on the team, but apparently, the team feels they need to open things up in the leadership department and award 'the reigns' if you would, to someone who can indeed push the team to the next level.

 

No right or wrong way to go about choosing a captain, but just saying, personally, I think it works best if there is an undisputed leader....and of course, that that leader gets results.

Again, Jumbo Joe may still be the guy who helps get results, but it sure looks like the organization is questioning that just a hair and would like to see who else can step up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I actually kind of like this strategy, I think every team should vote every year during training camp.

 

  Yes, I've always felt this way. You don't ram a leader down a teams throat, you let them decide who they want to follow. Team's that pick the captain are WAY overstepping their bounds. Way to much meddling going on there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good move. When the team started fading against the Kings Thornton did not step up and help right the ship. That is the Captains job. The team has failed miserably in the post season. The captain went down with the ship. Being Called Mr. October is great for Reggie Jackson not so great for a hockey player.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

in a results based league, his leadership has provided a big fat goose-egg.

 

How much of that is on Thornton, though. The Sharks have always seemed to underperform in the playoffs. I can't help but wonder if there's not more than an institutional problem there. I think the same thing has been true with the Sens, and there have been many years that I've felt like pulling my hair out over coaching and management decisions. Can a player really be saddled with blame like that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@ScottM  I'm actually trying to deflect some of the blame away from Joe. It's a fact they have not won while he has been the captain. I think he has to take at least some of the blame, but it's certainly not all on him. The goaltending was putrid in that Kings series, it was not Joe's fault they went with that tandem, he had nothing to do with that. The fact he could not eek out a win in just one of those final 4 games is an indictment against his leadership skills, sometimes a captain has to lead by example, take the bull by the horns and get'er done. He did not do that. If it was just this series, perhaps he gets a pass, but we are talking year after year of a talented roster that never got it done. Even if it's not his fault, the winds of change were a blowing. It was just time to go in a different direction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How much of that is on Thornton, though. The Sharks have always seemed to underperform in the playoffs. I can't help but wonder if there's not more than an institutional problem there. I think the same thing has been true with the Sens, and there have been many years that I've felt like pulling my hair out over coaching and management decisions. Can a player really be saddled with blame like that?

Excellent question. In basketball, you can sometimes legitimately place the blame on a player.

In hockey, outside of a complete goalie meltdown, I don't think so.

Even Steve Yzerman was questionable as a team captain until suddenly he was carrying the Cup (and another, and another).

I think with a guy who has experienced that kind of blame, though, the task of overcoming that stigma becomes increasingly difficult--internally and mentally as well as fanbase and media.

I don't think Joe Thornton can carry a team at this point (I'm in the camp who never thought he could). But he could go somewhere and be a great team player and be very instrumental in that team's success.

This is not a particularly brave prediction since mathematically the odds work greatly in my favor but here goes anyway: the Sharks will NEVER win a Cup with Joe Thornton on the roster. Both team and player need to realize that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@ScottM  I'm actually trying to deflect some of the blame away from Joe. It's a fact they have not won while he has been the captain. I think he has to take at least some of the blame, but it's certainly not all on him. The goaltending was putrid in that Kings series, it was not Joe's fault they went with that tandem, he had nothing to do with that. The fact he could not eek out a win in just one of those final 4 games is an indictment against his leadership skills, sometimes a captain has to lead by example, take the bull by the horns and get'er done. He did not do that. If it was just this series, perhaps he gets a pass, but we are talking year after year of a talented roster that never got it done. Even if it's not his fault, the winds of change were a blowing. It was just time to go in a different direction.

 

Yeah, Niemi was awful during the collapse. I've been home from work today due to being sick, and I've watched some of that series on NHL network. I'm not disputing that they have to do something. And maybe moving the C will rattle the team enough that they respond. Someone else at captain might be the answer for them. That said, the fact that I was able to predict to some friends that the Kings would come back in the series after they won game 5 based on the Sharks history says a lot about the issues that team has.

 

Who should get the C? If it's not going to be Thornton, why not give it to Pavelski? Coming off of that 41 goal season, he really seems to have stepped up his game. Maybe he can give them a spark.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


the Sharks will NEVER win a Cup with Joe Thornton on the roster. Both team and player need to realize that.

 

  It is looking more and more like you are correct. A fresh start is needed by both parties. Chicago would have been a perfect fit before the Richards signing. Joe could have settled down on the 2nd line and let Towes carry the load. That would have been a real nice fit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, Niemi was awful during the collapse. I've been home from work today due to being sick, and I've watched some of that series on NHL network. I'm not disputing that they have to do something. And maybe moving the C will rattle the team enough that they respond. Someone else at captain might be the answer for them. That said, the fact that I was able to predict to some friends that the Kings would come back in the series after they won game 5 based on the Sharks history says a lot about the issues that team has.

Who should get the C? If it's not going to be Thornton, why not give it to Pavelski? Coming off of that 41 goal season, he really seems to have stepped up his game. Maybe he can give them a spark.

Yeah, if not Pavelski, then Logan Couture

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is looking more and more like you are correct. A fresh start is needed by both parties. Chicago would have been a perfect fit before the Richards signing. Joe could have settled down on the 2nd line and let Towes carry the load. That would have been a real nice fit.

Completely agree. Good call on Chicago. A team like St. Louis could use him, too, but he'd be dangerously close to being "the" guy again so I think that attempt would be ultimately doomed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, Niemi was awful during the collapse. I've been home from work today due to being sick, and I've watched some of that series on NHL network. I'm not disputing that they have to do something. And maybe moving the C will rattle the team enough that they respond. Someone else at captain might be the answer for them. That said, the fact that I was able to predict to some friends that the Kings would come back in the series after they won game 5 based on the Sharks history says a lot about the issues that team has.

 

Who should get the C? If it's not going to be Thornton, why not give it to Pavelski? Coming off of that 41 goal season, he really seems to have stepped up his game. Maybe he can give them a spark.

 

 

 It should be either Pavelski or Logan Couture. I have a feeling youth wins the day and they hand the reigns to the kid. He is ready. Pavelski would be a good choice, but the problem is, he was also part of the many disappointments in SJ....Logan gives you the fresh start they really need.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just read Joe could get the captaincy back....wtf goes on around here?

 

Sheesh. This sounds like one of those situations where someone sitting around the table said, "Hey I have a hair-brained idea that is sure to turn into a clusterphuck, let's try it." And nobody stopped that person.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, in theory, this is a good idea, and I am sure teams still go through the process of figuring out who best to give the official leadership roles to, but there IS something to be said for consistency, you know, when there is NO QUESTION, as to who your on-ice and locker room leader is.

 

And if Joe is the undisputed leader, he'll get it back each year.  It'll just be a formality of sorts, maybe even a locker room joke to kick off the season.

 

In all honesty, does it even matter though?  These guys play a team sport.  The onus is on *everybody* to step up when needed.  You make your own luck, not wait for someone else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand what the hell the Sharks are doing this summer. Wilson talked about rebuilding, but then they signed a useless goon and have since backed off on the rebuild talk. Now they strip Thornton of the "C", but say it wasn't really a stripping and he'll have a chance to earn it back. Either commit to changes or commit to what you have. The Sharks seem to be trying to do both at the same time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand what the hell the Sharks are doing this summer. Wilson talked about rebuilding, but then they signed a useless goon and have since backed off on the rebuild talk. Now they strip Thornton of the "C", but say it wasn't really a stripping and he'll have a chance to earn it back. Either commit to changes or commit to what you have. The Sharks seem to be trying to do both at the same time.

 

  I agree 100%....either commit to a fresh new start or don't even bring it up. What a bunch of wishy washy crap!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  I agree 100%....either commit to a fresh new start or don't even bring it up. What a bunch of wishy washy crap!!

 

Yeah, I sort of agree here.  Either rebuild or not.  If you plan on doing something in between, call it reloading (or whatever Philadelphia does).

 

Maybe the confusing part is how we use the verbiage on this forum?  I mean, we consider a rebuild as scorching the Earth and building from the draft - which takes years.  That isn't the only way to do things though.  You can build through the draft, and introduce younger players to the NHL level while the seasoned pros are still on the roster.  Whatever that word is, maybe that's what they meant?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...