Thread: Why Henrik?
View Single Post
01-09-2012, 01:14 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Caledon
Country: Canada
Posts: 136
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by dsedin View Post
Sedins are the class of the NHL, don't believe everything you hear in the media. As you said they're one of the top players in the NHL and they're obviously the best players on the team on a consistent basis. If you're suggesting he shouldn't be the captain because he can't/doesn't stand up for himself- not every skilled player is of the same mold, Sedins are definately not the type of players to retaliate with dirty antics. For all the punishment they take, they do quite well- Henrik has the most consecutive played among active players I believe. The only time fans of opposing teams come out of the woodworks to suggest the Sedins shy away from the rough stuff is when you have guys like Marchand and Bolland getting their way with them (most of which is illegal and fails to get called).

Kesler, in my opinion, and many other Canucks feel the same way, is a bit too immature for the role- I don't think it's completely improbable that he can fulfil the role as the captain, but as long as the Sedins are here, it's their team. Bieksa is way too inconsistent with his play, but he's a very important part of the team's leadership group, hence the alternate captaincy designation.

Canucks are a very well knit group of players, you would note this if you watched more Canucks games. As for grit and aggressiveness, it's definately an issue that needs to addressed, and many Canucks fans voice their displeasure for the lack of it. Having said that, the Canucks play a physical game by committee- for instance, they were one of the most physical teams in last years playoffs but were knocked at for lacking grit and agressiveness regardless. I think this has a lot to do with the make-up of the team than anything else- four lines that can play hockey.
I am now enlightened. Well done

matsblue13 is offline   Reply With Quote