Is it Claude Giroux?

[flyercanuck]

20 minutes ago, FD19372 said:

Coots is my choice. He digs in, plays hard every shift and knows how to defend. The same cannot be said for our current captain, and other forwards on the team. Too soon for Provy, though he is undoubtedly the next one.

 

JVR. What better player to wear the C on the Flyers than a guy who usually just doesn't give a crap and then magically comes out guns-a=blazin' when nobody else gives a crap?

[FD19372]

9 minutes ago, flyercanuck said:

 

JVR. What better player to wear the C on the Flyers than a guy who usually just doesn't give a crap and then magically comes out guns-a=blazin' when nobody else gives a crap?

If that happens, go 'Canes and Avs!

[mojo1917]

1 hour ago, CoachX said:

Coots? Yes

His contract situation is why he wasn't my first choice. It certainly wasn't his play, which is stellar.

When I think about this, I really wonder what kind of contract Sean will want? If it is too beaucoup,I fear he'll be traded or worse allowed to walk.

This is why I went with Provorov...I was thinking long-term stability, he's signed to a fair contract for 5 more years. Couturier's deal is up the same time as Giroux's I believe.  The deal he signed wound up undervaluing him, I think he'll want to at least "make up the difference" I would, but what then does that do to the cap going forward?

That alone was why I picked #9

 

 

[CoachX]

5 minutes ago, mojo1917 said:

His contract situation is why he wasn't my first choice. It certainly wasn't his play, which is stellar.

When I think about this, I really wonder what kind of contract Sean will want? If it is too beaucoup,I fear he'll be traded or worse allowed to walk.

This is why I went with Provorov...I was thinking long-term stability, he's signed to a fair contract for 5 more years. Couturier's deal is up the same time as Giroux's I believe.  The deal he signed wound up undervaluing him, I think he'll want to at least "make up the difference" I would, but what then does that do to the cap going forward?

That alone was why I picked #9

 

 

Coots aint going anywhere. you can relax

[mojo1917]

9 minutes ago, CoachX said:

Coots aint going anywhere. you can relax

You and Chuck are agreeing?

good.

[CoachX]

5 minutes ago, mojo1917 said:

You and Chuck are agreeing?

good.

he's a smart guy

[Podein25]

4 hours ago, mojo1917 said:

If it is too beaucoup,I fear he'll be traded or worse allowed to walk.

 

Can't believe you missed the opportunity to finish that sentence properly, viz: "if it is too beaucoup there will much ado about the team going to poo." 

 

Or something. 

 

Edited February 8, 2021 by Podein25

[trevluk]

On 2/6/2021 at 2:20 PM, fan4ever said:

Just sitting here wondering if maybe our captain is the problem? Don't get me wrong, I've been a Giroux fan and even have a jersey!  

 

Is it the players, they've been changed up somewhat.  Is it the coaching, they've been changed completely.  

 

Is it the captain?  We've been yoyoing since he became captain, up year, down year, etc.  Maybe he isn't the leader we need right now.

 

I don't know???? 

 

Possibly the worst captain in Flyers history. Not all his fault, he got the C way too early and Lavy didn't do him any favors by calling him the best player in the world. He wasn't even close to being in that conversation and he never recovered from the expectations that he couldn't live up to. Flyers will never win a Cup with Giroux as captain. Decent player but not a leader in any way.

[mojo1917]

@trevluk

He definitely should have won a title by now, all those year he wasted the talents of Boyd Gordon, Dale Weiss, Chris VanVelde, Matt Read ( who was alright) ,Bellemare ( whom I liked) and Andrew MacDonald.

Certainly a failure not capitalizing on having those guys on the team. 

With Lavy you're talking about a thing that happened 8 years ago.

The team has been "not good" until the last 2 years.

So sure,  the guy who spent multiple seasons being responsible for more than 60% of his team's scoring, he's the problem

He's not Sidney Crosby, but he's been a hell of a value for a 22 overall pick. 

Who aside from Timonen would have been a better choice? 

 

 

 

 

[CoachX]

1 hour ago, mojo1917 said:

 Timonen would have been a better choice

fixed it!

[mojo1917]

@CoachX

At the time I thought 44 should have been the guy. 

I wonder who ultimately made the decision and what the rationale was?

Contract length, age , some sort of continuity thing, ability to market around an NA player is more palatable?

 

 

[Cheesesteak]

12 hours ago, mojo1917 said:

@trevluk

He definitely should have won a title by now, all those year he wasted the talents of Boyd Gordon, Dale Weiss, Chris VanVelde, Matt Read ( who was alright) ,Bellemare ( whom I liked) and Andrew MacDonald.

Certainly a failure not capitalizing on having those guys on the team. 

With Lavy you're talking about a thing that happened 8 years ago.

The team has been "not good" until the last 2 years.

So sure,  the guy who spent multiple seasons being responsible for more than 60% of his team's scoring, he's the problem

He's not Sidney Crosby, but he's been a hell of a value for a 22 overall pick. 

Who aside from Timonen would have been a better choice? 

 

 

 

 

I was thinking it should've gone to Jason Smith....not realizing how short his time here would have been.

[elmatus]

What I’m not really sure i understand is what exactly folks think would have happened this past decade if someone else we’ve had on the roster had worn the C. It’s not as if sewing a letter on a jersey magically morphs a player into McJesus.

 

Sure, it would be nice if we had our own version of that kind of player, and then this would never even be a debate. The fact is, we don’t... we haven’t since the 90s frankly.

 

Would the team have been better these last ten years if Voracek had been capt? Couts? Provorov (for the last few years)? Who else? Scotty Hartnell? Shea Weber?

 

i mean, what exactly is the magical option that wasn’t discovered? Would Raffl have taken the leap to Pastrnak if they sewed a C on his jersey?

 

That letter could have been given to anyone else over the past decade, and absolutely zero would have changed. This team’s roster has just not been strong enough to contend for the entirety of Giroux’ tenure. Period. 

 

Is it one now? It doesn’t look like it. What do we need? That’s a great question. Blaming Giroux for the team’s shortcomings is little more than a short sighted excuse as far as I’m concerned. This isn’t singles tennis. 

Edited February 23, 2021 by elmatus

[flyercanuck]

7 hours ago, Cheesesteak said:

I was thinking it should've gone to Jason Smith....not realizing how short his time here would have been.

 

Smith was captain for a year in 2007/8. Giroux played 2 games that year.

[fan4ever]

9 hours ago, elmatus said:

What I’m not really sure i understand is what exactly folks think would have happened this past decade if someone else we’ve had on the roster had worn the C. It’s not as if sewing a letter on a jersey magically morphs a player into McJesus.

 

Sure, it would be nice if we had our own version of that kind of player, and then this would never even be a debate. The fact is, we don’t... we haven’t since the 90s frankly.

 

Would the team have been better these last ten years if Voracek had been capt? Couts? Provorov (for the last few years)? Who else? Scotty Hartnell? Shea Weber?

 

i mean, what exactly is the magical option that wasn’t discovered? Would Raffl have taken the leap to Pastrnak if they sewed a C on his jersey?

 

That letter could have been given to anyone else over the past decade, and absolutely zero would have changed. This team’s roster has just not been strong enough to contend for the entirety of Giroux’ tenure. Period. 

 

Is it one now? It doesn’t look like it. What do we need? That’s a great question. Blaming Giroux for the team’s shortcomings is little more than a short sighted excuse as far as I’m concerned. This isn’t singles tennis. 

 

Well since I started this nightmare of a topic...I am not saying that anything would have changed, and I'm not in the locker room but I just was wondering if G has been holding people (Jake) accountable as perhaps a captain should.  I have been watching certain players taking shifts off, periods off, entire games off, coming out slow, etc.  It has frustrated me over the years!  Just looking for answers.  I have never implied that it is entirely G's fault.  

[CoachX]

Maybe the issue isn't, "would the team have been better with another Captain?", but "Would Giroux have been better without it"

 

Like with Mike Richards, both players came on strong, and showed signs of brilliance. They quickly became the face of the franchise, and were anointed just as fast. In my opinion, the added pressure to perform in this role, when they weren't ready for it, retarded the early brilliance they displayed.

 

I can't speak for other cities, but in Philly, performance from star players better be given, or else wrath will ensue. Just ask Mike Schmidt. And lets not overlook the goalie problem. If being a goalie in Philly comes with added pressure because of the legend before you, so can being captain

[OccamsRazor]

1 hour ago, CoachX said:

"Would Giroux have been better without it"

 

I think it would have been he doesn't strike me as a guy who plays well under pressure.

 

And in Richie's case he had previously been the Captain in Kitchener for two years before going pro which always helps.

 

It is better to start as a leader of kids than a leader men in most cases.

 

And combine that with Giroux's personality and well he just isn’t a get in your face type of leader. Right or wrong.

 

Back in the day I would have bestowed the honor on Kimmo Timonen one of my all time favorite Flyers.

 

Guess we'll never know what might have been.

[mojo1917]

@fan4ever

I don't know that it's a "nightmare topic".

He's been an easy scapegoat because the team has struggled while he's been the face of the franchise.

I think @CoachX brings up an interesting question as to whether a the burden was too great for the young players.

I don't know if there is an answer to that question. Both have had successful careers by most standards. 

I can see where both Richards and Giroux struggled with it especially early in their time as captain.

In G's case he had never been a captain before. 

Going from one of the guys to the guy is hard socially among your peers in addition to every other responsibility that comes with leadership.

Changing one's behavior because now leadership is included in one's work responsibilities often leads to failure. 

People see through ingenuousness, if a guys isn't a yeller or a vicious son-of-a-bitch before getting a letter sewn on his sweater, what's the point of being one after? 

There is a lot to be discussed when talking about leadership in it's various forms. 

I don't think the teams as constructed during the last decade see much greater success with a different captain, if all we're doing is picking a different guy from the Flyers. 

 

 

 

Edited February 23, 2021 by mojo1917

[CoachX]

1 hour ago, OccamsRazor said:

And in Richie's case he had previously been the Captain in Kitchener for two years before going pro which always helps

Sure, I can see where that would help. I just don't think it did. I recall numerous threads from many of us, criticizing his lack of leadership and overindulgence of social activity

 

The thing is, when looking at the person who is in the spot, you can't just base it on that person's previous experience or current maturity. In Philly, you have to factor in the ownership. The Flyers are notorious for having ex-flyers in key management positions. Those ex-flyers represent a time when the team was mythical and legendary. I imagine a captain being constantly reminded of those who came beofre him, and what he is supposed to represent. Hell, just go visit Bullies Pub.Its almost like Bernie and the boys are still skating

 

And lets not forget the city itself. You know, the one that puts up a statue because they won a single superbowl, and another statue for a fictional character who is more popular thatn most of the real athletes. Rocky represents and reflects what Philadelphia believes its people, and athletes are, and are supposed to be. So, take a young guy who is who hopefully building his own legend, tell him he's the next one, laud him as "one of the greatest in the world", and give him the responsibilty of being THE GUY, and watch what happens.

 

Neither will lead the Flyers to a Stanley Cup

[elmatus]

6 hours ago, CoachX said:

Maybe the issue isn't, "would the team have been better with another Captain?", but "Would Giroux have been better without it"

 

Like with Mike Richards, both players came on strong, and showed signs of brilliance. They quickly became the face of the franchise, and were anointed just as fast. In my opinion, the added pressure to perform in this role, when they weren't ready for it, retarded the early brilliance they displayed.

 

I can't speak for other cities, but in Philly, performance from star players better be given, or else wrath will ensue. Just ask Mike Schmidt. And lets not overlook the goalie problem. If being a goalie in Philly comes with added pressure because of the legend before you, so can being captain

 

I can see where you're coming from to some extent here. I do think the whole "best player in the world" comment was ridiculous then and remains ridiculous now. Did Lavy think putting that kind of pressure on G might make him take that vaunted next step? I don't know. I suppose it's possible.

 

That said, regardless of his leadership ability, which obviously I can't speak to directly (none of us can), Giroux has been one of the most productive players in terms of scoring that we've ever had. It's not as if he's dropped the ball on that count.

 

Now, would the fan base prefer a grinder over a scorer? Yeah, I think probably that's true. Many of the issues leveled at G seem to be a question of his playstyle rather than his ability. Flyers fandom (myself included) like players who are of a certain ilk. We grew up watching bruisers and players with a mean streak. It's a big reason why many of us are fans of the team in the first place. The current team doesn't play that way aside from very brief exceptions. Of course, that's really a league-wide phenomenon, not just a Flyers one, but it matters more to fans who idolize the Clarkes and Lindroses than it might the Fedorovs and Sakics.

 

In other words, the notion that the league and game itself is shying away from some of its more brutish traditions is something particularly difficult for some of us to grasp. And I think the feeling of this "not being the game I remember" trickles to Giroux especially, because he is the captain of a team whose heroes are of a bygone era in a way that just isn't true of fans in most other franchises (the Bruins being a second possible exception, but they've been winning in this new era, whereas we have not...)

 

All that being said, imo the only way Giroux may have harmed this franchise is frankly by being too productive. Take him away from the equation, and all the pts he's got, and this team would have hit the bottom pretty hard. That might have meant more top picks or something, which I guess could have theoretically worked out better by this point... that's an awful lot of gambling and theory, but it's the closest I can really come to the whole "is it Claude Giroux?" question.

Edited February 23, 2021 by elmatus

[CoachX]

3 hours ago, elmatus said:

In other words, the notion that the league and game itself is shying away from some of its more brutish traditions is something particularly difficult for some of us to grasp

I flat refuse. And if that means I have to watch endless video reruns of Rick Tocchet beating up Scott Stevens, so be it

 

 

[Cheesesteak]

Giroux captain or not, since he's got the C, this team has been the least enjoyable to watch, save for a few good runs here and there, out of all the Flyers hockey I've watched( watched a bit in late 80s but not seriously until '91-'92 or so.

 

One detail that may've contributed greatly to that fact is the Flyers had to change their "break the bank for top players" approach due to the salary cap(that was why right? - it's been so long).

[FD19372]

46 minutes ago, Cheesesteak said:

Giroux captain or not, since he's got the C, this team has been the least enjoyable to watch, save for a few good runs here and there, out of all the Flyers hockey I've watched( watched a bit in late 80s but not seriously until '91-'92 or so.

 

One detail that may've contributed greatly to that fact is the Flyers had to change their "break the bank for top players" approach due to the salary cap(that was why right? - it's been so long).

Yes, now they've moved to this youth movement, after signing their absentee captain and overrated second line RW, to massive contracts with NMCs. Now they have no caproom unless they can move money, or get one of the big two (headaches), to waive their NMC, or find some other way. Yes, this team is boring as hell.

[elmatus]

1 hour ago, FD19372 said:

overrated second line RW, to massive contracts with NMCs.

Voracek doesn't have a NMC. Only Giroux and Hayes do.

[FD19372]

10 minutes ago, elmatus said:

Voracek doesn't have a NMC. Only Giroux and Hayes do.

My mistake. Yes, you are correct. Thanks.