Mitchell vs. Ohlund for Captain

[Icebreaka]

I've been thinking since the end of last season that Mitchell has to be to guy. Tough, rugged dude who commands your attention and is a local BC Boy. However I've been starting to think outside that box a little and wondering if Ohlund doesn't have some good qualities also.

I heard Mitchell speak on the subject last week and he didn't sound exactly enthusiastic about it. He figured they were all going to step up and be leaders, it didn't sound like the I want to put the team on my back and lead by example kind of speech at any rate.

Now I'm still a fan of Mitchell and I think he does have some qualities. The one thing though that concerns me is his lack of ability to dig deep and score a clutch goal when the team is really down and needs it. He's got zero offense and he'd be the first to admit it. On the other hand looking at Ohlund he's been here the longest, he's well respected by his peers. He's tough and will fight if called on. He doesn't fit the typical Swedish mold. He has a knack for knocking in enough clutch goals over the season to fit that leading by example mold. The more I think on the subject I'd be happy with Ohlund too. One knock on him is he doesn't seem super outspoken. He'll give an interview but he's not Mr. Chatty to the media either.

WHat do you guys think? I think it has to come down to one of these two guys looking at the roster. Some people mumble Bieksa but he's too young and who knows if we're keeping him around long term or trading him.

[Farhan Lalji]

I've been thinking since the end of last season that Mitchell has to be to guy. Tough, rugged dude who commands your attention and is a local BC Boy. However I've been starting to think outside that box a little and wondering if Ohlund doesn't have some good qualities also.

I heard Mitchell speak on the subject last week and he didn't sound exactly enthusiastic about it. He figured they were all going to step up and be leaders, it didn't sound like the I want to put the team on my back and lead by example kind of speech at any rate.

Now I'm still a fan of Mitchell and I think he does have some qualities. The one thing though that concerns me is his lack of ability to dig deep and score a clutch goal when the team is really down and needs it. He's got zero offense and he'd be the first to admit it. On the other hand looking at Ohlund he's been here the longest, he's well respected by his peers. He's tough and will fight if called on. He doesn't fit the typical Swedish mold. He has a knack for knocking in enough clutch goals over the season to fit that leading by example mold. The more I think on the subject I'd be happy with Ohlund too. One knock on him is he doesn't seem super outspoken. He'll give an interview but he's not Mr. Chatty to the media either.

WHat do you guys think? I think it has to come down to one of these two guys looking at the roster. Some people mumble Bieksa but he's too young and who knows if we're keeping him around long term or trading him.

Few things:

1) If Gillis trades Bieksa (for some dipshit forward that can't play without the twins), I will murder him.
2) I'd much rather see a captaincy rotation between Ohlund, Mitchell, Kesler, and Bieksa (and if not Kesler/Bieksa, than the twins).
3) Between Mitchell and Ohlund, I'd prefer Mitchell. He's more of an "alpha" type guy and is more vocal. My only concern is to what his relationship is with Veenyo (Veenyo was a dick to Mitchell last year when Mitchell was hurt....and made some dickhead comments in the media).

[Madcombinepilot]

Icebreaka wrote:
I've been thinking since the end of last season that Mitchell has to be to guy. Tough, rugged dude who commands your attention and is a local BC Boy. However I've been starting to think outside that box a little and wondering if Ohlund doesn't have some good qualities also.

I heard Mitchell speak on the subject last week and he didn't sound exactly enthusiastic about it. He figured they were all going to step up and be leaders, it didn't sound like the I want to put the team on my back and lead by example kind of speech at any rate.

Now I'm still a fan of Mitchell and I think he does have some qualities. The one thing though that concerns me is his lack of ability to dig deep and score a clutch goal when the team is really down and needs it. He's got zero offense and he'd be the first to admit it. On the other hand looking at Ohlund he's been here the longest, he's well respected by his peers. He's tough and will fight if called on. He doesn't fit the typical Swedish mold. He has a knack for knocking in enough clutch goals over the season to fit that leading by example mold. The more I think on the subject I'd be happy with Ohlund too. One knock on him is he doesn't seem super outspoken. He'll give an interview but he's not Mr. Chatty to the media either.

WHat do you guys think? I think it has to come down to one of these two guys looking at the roster. Some people mumble Bieksa but he's too young and who knows if we're keeping him around long term or trading him.

Few things:

1) If Gillis trades Bieksa (for some dipshit forward that can't play without the twins), I will murder him.
2) I'd much rather see a captaincy rotation between Ohlund, Mitchell, Kesler, and Bieksa (and if not Kesler/Bieksa, than the twins).
3) Between Mitchell and Ohlund, I'd prefer Mitchell. He's more of an "alpha" type guy and is more vocal. My only concern is to what his relationship is with Veenyo (Veenyo was a dick to Mitchell last year when Mitchell was hurt....and made some dickhead comments in the media).

1)Bieksa isn't going anywhere. None of our D should be moved. have we not learned that injuries are coiming? We will be looking to upgrade one of our plethora of second liners with a move like Pyatt and a prospect for an upgrade on Pyatt.. a small move looking for an upgrade on guys we already have. with 8 (or so) second liners and only 3 second line slots, this is the most obvious move, imo.
2) every player on this team (ESPECIALLY the ones from Minny) hate the idea of a revolving captaincy.
3) I agree with Mitchell, but for different reasons. I simply don't want to take focus from any of our multi-purpose units. Mitchell is a single purpose unit (defence only) and the added press time (and associated headaches) shouldn't bother him as much as guys like Kes or Ollie. Trying to keep the associated drama of the press of guys can only help this team, as yes, the press in vancouver are (for the most parts) cloned retarded, red-headed stepchildren that have not recieved thier daily dosages of metal bar beatings.

[Linden Is God]

I would be happy with either Mitchell or Ohlund. I could care less if Mitchell doesn't have any offence. I really don't think that should matter as long as he leads the team and always lays it on the line when it counts.

As for a rotation, even Demitra and Mitchell said it was lame. I think any team that does that won't go anywhere.

[dr.dork]

I would be happy with either Mitchell or Ohlund. I could care less if Mitchell doesn't have any offence. I really don't think that should matter as long as he leads the team and always lays it on the line when it counts.

As for a rotation, even Demitra and Mitchell said it was lame. I think any team that does that won't go anywhere.

My choices (in order) are:

1. Mitchell;
2. Ohlund;
3. Kesler.

And I won't whine about any of those three. If Sundin gets his head out of his butt and signs, I won't have a problem with him as captain either.

But the defacto captain is Louie anyway, so the so-called "real" captain is a formality only.

[Cornuck]

After listening to the interview during the game tonight, I don't think I'd make Ohlund captain. I like the guy and hope he stays, but he didn't seem like signing long term or with a NTC was a priorty.

I think that Mitchell could do a decent job. I don't think we need another quiet captain for a while - especially if we promote some kids this year.

[Bartman]

For me the choice is between Mitchell and Kessler. Ohlund is too far along in his career and too close to the end of his contract. Kessler might not be ready for the position just yet so my vote would go to Mitchell. He's a local boy, a warrior, a leader on and off the ice and plays big minutes in key situations. Some have stated that his rumored clashing with AV would get in the way of his getting the C but to me that doesn't matter one bit. A captain is the leader in the room and on the ice not a coaching tool. Having them on the same page is a bonus but not a must.

So Willie for Captain!

[Cookie La Rue]

I don't know if Kesler is ready but his age shouldn't be a factor, at least if you think about that Trevor Linden was just 21 when named as a Captain.

It could also give Kesler an extra-boost.

[puckhead]

For me the choice is between Mitchell and Kessler.

Me too. Ohlund's comments on the radio were definintely not leadership-inspiring.
also, revolving captaincy is a very, very dumb indea. it eliminates the importance of the position altogether.


I would also lean towards Mitchell, because:
1) Mitchell dreamed of being a Canuck all of his life. It is in his blood.
2) Kesler seems like a bit of an asshole. Thats a very good thing on the ice, but I'm not sure if that's the character we want to stamp our entire team with.
3) Kesler is doing so well in his player development, I wouldn't want to saddle him with unneccesary burden.

C: Mitchell
A: Kesler, Ohlund

[JCardinal]

Mitchell absolutely, it's just a natural fit on so many levels. He's *very* good with the p.r. stuff, even taking the time to do it in the off season on the radio, he's local, he's not going anywhere for the forseeable future and he's got the ability to project a calmness when things are going to shit as they inevitably will sometime this season and the reporters start asking for blood.

[Joe Rockhead]

Ohlund.

Mitchell has a good stick and seems to be positioned fairly well but thats it as far as the on ice stuff goes. He does good charity work and seems some what prominent in the Community. Thats all well and good but I don't watch hockey for what the players do outside the rink.

I get the feeling Keseler is thought of as a weasel/bitch by other players around the league, judging by the # of times he's been force fed wood or stomped on. The other players in the league have no respect for him at all and actually seem to have open contempt. Markus Naslund was very respected around the league, the only people that showed him no respect were the asshole media in town and that piece of trash steve moore.

If I was coach I wouldn't name a captain and only have the "A"'s that I had last season. That way I would save one of my players from the retarded media scrums. Iwould also tell the media that is the reason.