If EK is moved, no captain should be named until the future roster clarifies itself, perhaps this guy knows more but you certainly don't give the C to a guy on a 1 year deal regardless of skill.
News Article: More from Warren
- Thread starter Sensung
- Start date
They've been talking about that fact nonstop on TSN1200. I've heard them mention it several times. I think Brennan even talked about asking Boucher for a chat at the draft and GB said he couldn't.
swiftwin
★SUMMER.OF.PIERRE★
- Jul 26, 2005
- 23,579
- 12,963
You guys complain when he opens his mouth, you guys complain when he keeps it shut. Just can't win...
BonkTastic
ಠ_ಠ
I think the plan for Stone being "next in line" has been around for long enough that Warren is probably assuming that nothing has changed. At least, until he hears otherwise.
Stone has been groomed for a letter for a while now. For a long time, the assumption was he was going to fill the #2 role next to EK, like Fisher did with Alfie. With the real possibility of Karlsson leaving, Warren is probably just playing Mad Libs with the leadership chart until he hears whether or not the 1 year deal will change the assumed order of succession. That would be my best guess, at least.
Before the Karlsson trade rumours, I believe the hierarchy for a letter was basically
C) Karlsson
A#1) Stone
A#2) Duchene
A#3) Boro
If the team decides to blow itself up (pun intended) and decides to trade Stone and Duchene and rebuild, don't be surprised to see Boro get a permanent A on his jersey, and have an outside shot at the captaincy.
Last edited:
BonkTastic
ಠ_ಠ
It wpuldn't surprise me at all.
This organizarion has put it's foot in it's mouth so many times over the past year that I wouldn't doubt if they've gone media silent on purpose out of a sense of self-preservation.
I mean... If you already know that nothing you can say will help, why bother? Wait for a good news cycle (god forbid that actually ever happens), make the bare minimum number of press showings (mandatory ones, like at training camp), and hope that your fortunes get better.
Basically the NHL version of "going to the Winchester for a pint until this all blows over"
Where I work, that's known as 'always know when to go get a haircut'.
BonHoonLayneCornell
Registered User
The unfortunate side effect we're seeing with this strategy is that now all these question are getting put to the players, and it's only a matter of time until some of those answers cause problems and/or get spun/blown out of proportion like we've seen on this board already with Boro's comments.
BonkTastic
ಠ_ಠ
Haha, agreed.
Never said it was a good strategy, lol. Just that I understand the thought process behind it.
Stylizer1
SENSimillanaire
That's not true. Management had complete control over the situation aka the media. Murray never treated Spezza like he did alfie and when it came time to stick up for the guy he didn't. For all the heavy lifting Spezza did for this team he was never given a break. When it was clear management were never going to try and win he wanted out. He should still be the captain here now and retired a Senator.
BonHoonLayneCornell
Registered User
If only he said what a general manager should say when it was open everything would be fine.
Qward
Because! That's why!
I agree with not naming a captain. We would have had 4 captains in 4 years. If they name Stone and he walks then we would be dealing with 5/5. Talk about stability.
Karl Prime
Registered User
- Feb 13, 2017
- 4,601
- 4,340
I wouldn't expect him to give us every detail about what's been going on, but we still don't really know anything because Dorion hasn't said anything this summer apart from "we offered Karlsson a contract like we said we would."
Nac Mac Feegle
wee & free
- Jun 10, 2011
- 34,868
- 9,289
Even if Stone stays, I'd rather he stick with an A. Just my opinion here, but he's a strong candidate to fall off a cliff at the wrong side of 30. Putting a C on him will just give the fans something else to complain about in a few years when he's riding his monster UFA contract and his play drops. I'd rather not see yet another long-timer end up with a Phillips/Neil type ending.
Ray Kinsella
Registered User
- Feb 13, 2018
- 2,105
- 955
danielpalfredsson
youtube dot com /watch?v=CdqMZ_s7Y6k
- Aug 14, 2013
- 16,575
- 9,269
The team has been grooming him in a leadership role for quite some time. His locker was moved in the room to allow him to further be cemented as one of the leading voices of the players.
Looking at the roster post Karlsson trade, who would be the candidates?
In no particular order, Duchene, Smith, Ryan, and Borowiecki are probably the only three I can think of. Smith has been in trade rumours, and if we're ever decent Borowiecki might find himself as a healthy scratch some of the time as he's been at certain points a 7th D at the NHL level. Granted, I am not in the room, and I am going off of what we hear from news articles and reports about the team. Ryan might not be around after the Karl trade, and he seems to miss considerable time due to injuries.
To me, it seems far too obvious that Stone is next in line if Karl is traded. Obviously, there's a hitch with Stone having to be extended beyond this season. If we blow everything up, move Stone, Duchene, and Karlsson, just do a full rebuild, I could see Borowiecki or Smith as bridge captains. I don't think we want to blow it up, but our hand could be forced considering those three players are all UFAs after this season ends.
danielpalfredsson
youtube dot com /watch?v=CdqMZ_s7Y6k
- Aug 14, 2013
- 16,575
- 9,269
Here's a Globe and Mail article from mid season profiling Stone's rise as a leader.
Clayonator
Registered User
Stone is the no brainer if and when Karl is moved. Something tells me Duchene will be easier to extend than him for some reason, and would logically be the NEXT next in line. 3 captains in 3 seasons potentially 
Oh I wasn’t saying he was my choice but rather he’s the one who seems most likely. I still haven’t made up my mind. If EK is traded, I’d rather the team not have a captain this season.
danielpalfredsson
youtube dot com /watch?v=CdqMZ_s7Y6k
- Aug 14, 2013
- 16,575
- 9,269
As explained in Section 13(c)ii of the Standard Player Contract (SPC) [Exhibit 1 of the CBA], clubs are permitted to perform a buyout outside the regular period during the 48 hour period beginning on the third day after the final of a) settlement of the Club's final arbitration case. b) receipt of the Club's last arbitration award. A buyout can only be performed on a player who was on the clubs reserve list at 3:00pm on the most recent trade deadline, and for the 2018 off-season, must have a cap hit of at least $3,318,024. (capfriendly.com)
The Senators had a buyout period opened up because they were taken to arbitration, but that period has since closed. They cannot buyout Gaborik until next season (if he's healthy during any of their applicable buyout periods).
The most optimistic thing that could happen with Gaborik from the viewpoint of helping the Senators would be for him to be LTIRetired and actually insured. Due to his long injury history, if he is hurt due to a pre-existing condition, I've heard in the past that it's possible he would not be covered and the team would be on the hook for his entire salary, but I don't know for sure.
Warren mentioned the concept of tacking Gaborik on to Karlsson in a trade. That's an interesting middle ground between tacking on Ryan's contract and not adding on a cap dump contract at all. We've seen how guys have been able to essentially retire without retiring and go on LTIR in the past due to injuries that seem coincidentally suspect (Hossa's skin being unbearable once his salary drops to only 1M per season...), so a cap ceiling team would be more readily able to take Gaborik in a deal because unlike with Ryan they could put Gaborik on LTIR and get back some or all of his salary in the form of LTIR relief.
For example, in a Vegas deal for Karlsson, we know David Clarkson is insured. If Gaborik is not insured, a Gaborik for Clarkson swap would have very little cap implications for Vegas but would help Ottawa tremendously when it comes to saving cash.
L'Aveuglette
つ ◕_◕ ༽つ
Well this is just such a stark contrast to him running his trap when we are having the littlest bit of success.
bert
Registered User
Its like the organization wrote the article its self lol. Pathetic. I hope that most sens fans arent buying this pathetic mismanagement as some sort of positive spin off. Sensung makes a good point whats the plan?!... The idea that Tkachuk is being handed a spot when he needs so much more development is so sens. I think they actually think a 19 year old rookie can change the culture of an NHL team when he isnt even NHL ready is so this current ownership/management sens.
Last edited:
