Patty Kane no A (letter on sweater)

[Voight]

So Patrick Kane, the best player the hawks have ever had, doesn’t even get to wear an A at home. Pretty disrespectful IMO. What do you guys think ?

Ever heard of Bobby Hull or Stan Mikita? Google them.

This team has been around since the 20s, not the 90s.

Seabrook's bad.

He helped us win 3 cups so he more than earned his contract. Yea it sucks his play fell off a cliff shortly after signing his deal but I am very happy with winning 3 cups in 6 years.

 

[Los merengues]

Doesn't matter if he really was the best player in the team's history [which he isn't anyway] having a letter on the team sweater is about FAR more then individual skills. Far to many people somehow don't recognize that.

Definitely is.

 

[IceManCat]

One of those overreaction threads

 

[Muffin]

You don't have to be the best player to be the best leader, there's a reason Landeskog wears the C over MacKinnon.

 

[ijuka]

He may be but that doesn't diminish his role with franchise and respect his teammates have for him both former and current

You think they have more respect for him than Kane?

You don't have to be the best player to be the best leader, there's a reason Landeskog wears the C over MacKinnon.

MacKinnon has A.

 

[Tweaky]

2013 was their best overall roster IMO, mainly because of the D and team speed on all 4 lines. 2010 forwards had a bit more sandpaper if you will but the defense wasn’t quite as good. And Crawford > Niemi.

And yes the 2010 and 2013 Hawks rosters are most certainly some of the best NHL rosters ever assembled. That’s not hyperbole. I mean we’re talking 4-5 HOFers, a HOF coach, countless Olympians, all stars, etc. Elite bottom 6 forward depth(tough to compare to say the 80’s Oilers teams for example because teams were constructed differently back then and nowadays you need your bottom 6 to be dynamic and offensively capable)....but however you slice it I’d put those Hawks teams right up there with anyone else you can name, falling short to maybe only the 90s/early 2000s Red Wings.

You dont have to go back that far. The Avs '96 or especially the '01 roster (Sakic, Forsberg, Blake, Bourque, Roy, etc; this team had 6 starters in the all-star game that year on their playoff roster) were easily better. And the Red Wings rosters the late 90s and early 00s were right there as well. And the Pens with Lemieux, Jagr, Francis, Coffey, Murphy, etc. And others. If you want to limit it to cap-era, I have no argument. But pre-cap, there were some powerhouse teams that would be hard to pass.

 

[Muikea Bulju]

-Everyone knows Kane is the biggest pressure player / playoff performer on that team

-Everyone knows they have older guys who have been around for ever

-Everyone knows Kane has the MVP:s

-Everyone knows Kane is the biggest star & most recognizable player on the team already

He doesn't really need the letters. He already has the MVP:s

 

[jw2]

Lol what? Kane has earned the A over anyone. He’s the reason why you guys have cups

I think you may be a bit confused about the captain thing.

 

[Rick C137]

There’s so much misinformation in this thread it’s ridiculous. Kane doesn’t not have an A because “he’s not a good leader” or because of his personality. The only damn reason he doesn’t have a letter is because Keith has had a letter forever and they’re not gonna strip his letter and Seabrook by all accounts has been one of the most vocal guys in the locker room and a good leader and has been with the org longer. Kane is next in line and wears the A when one of the captains is out of the lineup.

I think so many people are stuck on their first impression of Kane and can’t see past that. He’s put a crazy amount of work in the past few offseasons and has been dragging some of the younger guys with him. From what I can understand he’s really emerged as a leader on this team over the past couple years and has set a really good example because of his strong work ethic.

Letter doesn’t mean shit to anyone but the fans. The guys in the room know who the leaders are and respect them.

 

[stl76]

Why not just rotate the A to everyone on the team so no one has to have their feelings hurt ?

What’s your point?

This has nothing to do with participation trophies. Plenty of teams have more than 2 assistant captains.

 

[Leonardo87]

He's our best player, far from best leader. Best player isn't always the leader. When your best player is your leader that just happens to be a bonus.

Was going to post something like this, very well said.

 

[DickSmehlik]

Scene from the locker room at a recent Blackhawk's game.

Kane: (trying to get his team fired up). "I got just one thing to say"!!!

(Random teammate): "ahh excuse me. Before you begin...where is your "A"?

Kane: "I uhhhhh...don't have one".

(Random teammate): "then sit down and STFU".

Kane (cowers in the corner).

 

[John Eichel da GOAT]

This is a perfect example of why you dont give your skilled players C/A's just because theyre the best. The guy ever since he came into the league acted like a punk. Maybe now he has finally grown up, but it shows he is not a leader in the lcoker room. If he was at all, Toews would call for an A and no would would argue.

 

[COHawk]

Just because you're the best player doesn't mean you're the best leader.

 

[SimpleJack]

You dont have to go back that far. The Avs '96 or especially the '01 roster (Sakic, Forsberg, Blake, Bourque, Roy, etc; this team had 6 starters in the all-star game that year on their playoff roster) were easily better. And the Red Wings rosters the late 90s and early 00s were right there as well. And the Pens with Lemieux, Jagr, Francis, Coffey, Murphy, etc. And others. If you want to limit it to cap-era, I have no argument. But pre-cap, there were some powerhouse teams that would be hard to pass.

I don’t see how that Avs roster was easily better. Hawks teams had just as many all stars and HOFers. The only glaring difference in favor of COL is Roy is net. The Hawks had multiple all star/Olympian level players in their bottom 6s and 3rd D pairings on top of that HOF core. The depth was what was so impressive and not sure you can pick one over the other when mentioning those Avs teams, Penguins teams, or Red Wings teams...though as I’ve already stated I’d probably take Detroit over any of them if I had to pick. All extremely close though. My initial point was only that CHI was among the all time great rosters, and I still don’t see how this is false is you compare position by position top to bottom.

 

[Prettyisland]

Look at his contract.. they clearly don’t respect him lmao.

 

[Nick0930]

He has one on the back of his jersey. That's good enough.

 

[Gatorbait19]

I have 2 questions/comments:

1. There’s no rule that says you can only have 1 C and 2 A’s. I believe the Canucks has 4 A’s for the first 2 games. So if the Hawks really wanted to give Kane the A, they could.

2. When Toews, Seabrook or Keith are out of lineup - do the Hawks give an A to Kane? Has he ever gotten it even for just 1 game?

 

[Regal]

I'm sure Kane gets lots of A

 

[Pez68]

This is a perfect example of why you dont give your skilled players C/A's just because theyre the best. The guy ever since he came into the league acted like a punk. Maybe now he has finally grown up, but it shows he is not a leader in the lcoker room. If he was at all, Toews would call for an A and no would would argue.

Lol...

 

[ryan callahan]

I bet you ******* as well when the Panthers chose Derek MacKenzie as their C over Barkov, Ekblad and Huberdeau.

 

[Eisen]

Definitely is.

He can duke it out with Pilote for number three.

 

[kook10]

Too many tangibles.

 

[snipes]

Are people really suggesting Kane is the best player the Hawks have ever had?

Hull, Chelios?

 

[Teemu]

Are people really suggesting Kane is the best player the Hawks have ever had?

Hull, Chelios?

We have a bit of a damnatio memoriae on those guys, Hull for his wife-beating and Chelios for his douchebaggery