Maybe he’ll show his leadership skills by taking the 2nd half of the season off this time.

At least it’s not Sasquatch.

Posted by Nate A from Detroit-ish on 10/07/08 at 04:15 PM ET

Maybe he’ll show his leadership skills by taking the 2nd half of the season off this time.

Is this the year that a Red Wings fan writes a new joke?

Posted by Earl Sleek from Anaheim, CA on 10/07/08 at 05:11 PM ET

Not a chance. It needs a place high on the shelf with “Chelios is old”

Posted by Nate A from Detroit-ish on 10/07/08 at 06:29 PM ET

Yeah, because it’s been SOOOOOOOOOOO long since that year that Niedermayer left his team twisting in the wind for half a season, right?

I would say it’s a very, VERY valid concern, and it’s a slap in the face to some of the other players to put the C on his jersey.

Posted by Garth on 10/07/08 at 06:35 PM ET

I would say it’s a very, VERY valid concern

And yet I get the feeling that if someone wanted to wager that Scott Niedermayer would in fact not ditch his team midseason, you probably wouldn’t want to take that bet.

If you do want to make that wager, though, make sure to get a hold of me right away.  I need some free money.

Posted by Earl Sleek from Anaheim, CA on 10/07/08 at 06:38 PM ET

Is this the year that a Red Wings fan writes a new joke?

It’s not a joke. It’s reality, Earl. Anytime a 34-year-old at the top of his game needs half a season to decide whether or not he’s “motivated” to play another year, he’s going to open himself up to valid criticism. Choosing that same guy a year later as your team captain opens the team up to valid criticism.

But it is LaLa Land – and Burke is the GM – so what else should we expect?

Posted by OlderThanChelios from Grand Rapids on 10/07/08 at 06:50 PM ET

Anytime a 34-year-old at the top of his game needs half a season to decide whether or not he’s “motivated” to play another year, he’s going to open himself up to valid criticism. Choosing that same guy a year later as your team captain opens the team up to valid criticism.

OK, but show me one place in this comments that represents valid criticism.

Scott taking months to decide his future (after telling his GM in June) is one thing; to walk out on a team mid-season without warning is another.  Somehow the two are getting confused (jokingly, sure), but I would say we are pretty far from “valid”.

Posted by Earl Sleek from Anaheim, CA on 10/07/08 at 06:55 PM ET

Ugh, Jesus, I hate having to spell stuff out.  The valid concern is that you’re giving the Captaincy to a guy who has shown in the past season that he is NOT a leader.  What does it say about the rest of your team that you’re passing over 22 players who didn’t *#$%@& up your team by waffling for half a season in favour of the guy whose indecision screwed over your team’s chemistry.

Maybe Burke only did this to try and make Vancouver naming Luongo their captain a little less ridiculous.

Posted by Garth on 10/07/08 at 07:19 PM ET

What does it say about the rest of your team that you’re passing over 22 players who didn’t *#$%@& up your team by waffling for half a season in favour of the guy whose indecision screwed over your team’s chemistry.

Last year’s playoff exit had much more to do with Pronger’s suspension and Perry’s injury than anything Scott or Teemu did.  I’ll trust my opinion and observations on this more than I’ll trust yours.

I’m pretty sure Scott’s the players’ choice in the lockerroom, and he’s been the captain for the franchise’s most successful season and postseason.  If all that’s true, how can this really be the wrong call?  Spell it out for me—I’m a slow Ducks fan.

Posted by Earl Sleek from Anaheim, CA on 10/07/08 at 10:10 PM ET

Sorry, don’t buy that their exit was due to Pronger’s suspension.  They rallied when he was suspended against the Red Wings the year before, so that’s no excuse.

I’ll spell it out for you.  Just because you’re “pretty sure” doesn’t make it fact.  So saying you’re “pretty sure” and using that to backup your opinion is just as much baseless speculation as my opinion.  Moreso, in fact, because at least my opinion was based on recent history, and how Niedermayer has shown what a “leader” and “team player” he is, whereas your opinion is based on your hope, because you’re a Ducks fan.

Posted by Garth on 10/08/08 at 07:06 AM ET

Garth sure has strong opinions and holds to them stubbornly, but he misses a lot of reality in his narrow world view.

Scott Niedermayer is a leader in the Anaheim dressing room.  He successfully captained the team to the Stanley Cup.  It makes a lot of sense to make him captain.  It makes little sense to hold petty grudges against top players over what happened last year (I would argue Niedermayer needed the time off and was stronger when he returned because of it), but that is what Garth seems to suggest.

Posted by PuckStopsHere on 10/08/08 at 07:26 AM ET

So saying you’re “pretty sure” and using that to backup your opinion is just as much baseless speculation as my opinion.

Then I suppose our conversation cannot continue if opinion is to be thrown out the door.  Good luck to you, Garth.  Here’s hoping we never do this again

Posted by Earl Sleek from Anaheim, CA on 10/08/08 at 07:32 AM ET

Maybe Burke only did this to try and make Vancouver naming Luongo their captain a little less ridiculous.

Not to drag this out any further but the rule that a goalie can’t be captain is the ridiculous part. Luongo, like PuckStopsHere said about Niedermayer, is the strongest leader in that room. Where he physically stands on the ice, outside of ceremonial aspects, is not the important part.

Posted by Yankee Canuck on 10/08/08 at 08:13 AM ET