2008-09 Rink Wrap: Chris Clark
by Stephen Pepper on May 22, 2009 7:00 AM EDT
in Rink Wraps
Email
PrintFrom Alzner to Varlamov, we're taking a look at and grading the 2008-09 season for every player who laced 'em up for the Caps for a significant number of games during the campaign, with an eye towards 2009-10. Next up, El Capitan, Chris Clark.
Chris Clark
#17 / Right Wing / Washington Capitals
6-0
193
Mar 08, 1976
9
$2,633,333 cap hit in 2009-10; UFA after 2010-11 season
4.20 rating
Key Stat: Chris Clark has played in just 58 NHL games since April of 2007, but committed 34 minor penalties in those contests (an average of approximately 0.6 minor penalties per game).
Interesting Stat: Clark's regular season Corsi rating was 2nd worst on the team (-5.0), ahead of only Boyd Gordon, but his rating improved in the playoffs to a modest 2.3.
The Good: If there be a definitive attribute to be discussed here, it is one shrouded in mystery. One quite literally behind closed doors.
For all that Clark hasn't brought in statistical value during the last two seasons, hampered by a lengthy list of injuries both acutely gruesome and inordinately frustrating and chronic (most recently playing with a broken forearm), Captain Cadaver has provided his young charges with an inspirational example of the rugged determination required to succeed in the NHL.
We've heard much about his leadership in the room and his ability to command attention. (Mike Vogel once referred to him as a John Wayne type of character, choosing words of signicifant import at the appropriate time.)
Unfortunately, he's not often been able to lead on the ice. And, despite his fortitude or timely dressing room remarks, two of three Game 7 failures under his captain's watch can be dispiriting. Ultimately, results matter.
At least Clark was able to return to regular action in the playoffs, and provide some decent fourth line minutes at ES during the Penguins series. He was a -1 in those playoff efforts (1 GF and 2 GA).
The Bad: Well, Clarkie wasn't signed to multi-year deal for over $2.5 million per just to help the team grow bigger cojones -- he was expected to produce in the goal scoring department as well. Especially a forward that once potted 30 goals on the top line two seasons ago. One goal during the regular season, and one in the playoffs, for that salary cap hit is dreadful. And we know that Clark himself would make no excuse for it.
And, particularly, he was counted on to score goals of a quality that the team sorely lacks: net crashing, junk collecting, whilst suffering the abuse that is part and parcel of parking oneself in the paint. Sadly, Clark was so often injured and thus incapable of leading by that critical example.
And further to the "key stat" above, Clark committed four minor penalties in the Penguins series, at least one of them retaliatory in nature. Not terribly captain-like.
Finally, given the aforementioned forearm injury, it would be a bit misleading to critique the frequency and quaity of Clark's shots at the net. But that said, beginning in training camp, he was "a shade off on the radar" and was never really able to make the necessary correction. An average of 2.2 shots per game in a full 2006-07 season earned him those 30 goals (and, it should be noted, his current lucrative deal as well). But this season and in the playoffs, injured and rusty at different times, that average fell to about one shot per game. (And in those eight playoff GP, only 14 total attempts at the net.)
The Vote: Rate Clark below on a scale of 1-10 (10 being the best) based on his performance relative to his potential and your expectations for the season - if he had the best year you could have imagined him having, give him a 10; if he more or less played as you expected he would, give him a 5 or a 6; if he had the worst year you could have imagined him having, give him a 1.
The Discussion: Can Clark return to any semblence of his 2006-07 form, or are those days long behind him? In either event, is Clark an effective leader for this Capitals team? Can he get this bunch into the third round and beyond during the remaining two years of his tenure, or should a change in captaincy be seriously considered prior to next season?
119 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I like the guy, but I could not find any positives other than the playoff goal scored while in front of the net.
by Moonage Daydream on May 22, 2009 7:15 AM EDT reply actions
He got in a fight with a broken arm – that’s something.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
something… some would call courageous, me, i call it retarded. With two good arms he can’t win a fight, why do it w/ one?
I think you’re confusing Clark with Bradley. Clark can totally win a fight.
I'm so sick and tired of the refs explaining the calls like this is the NFL.
by Whiter Mage on May 22, 2009 11:04 AM EDT up reply actions
According to Hockeyfights.com Clark has won one fight since 2003-2004. Bradley has won 2 in the last two seasons.
Hockeyfights.com is so full of shit. If a player is from a popular American team or Canadian, there’s a huge bias. Another point, Mark Staal “won” his fight with Semin, when all he did was take his shirt off, and then turtled. Other examples are evident, when clear Brash wins are considered losses because some fans are so enamored with the uniform that they ignore what actually happened.
I'm so sick and tired of the refs explaining the calls like this is the NFL.
by Whiter Mage on May 22, 2009 11:12 AM EDT up reply actions
That said, yes, I’ll admit to almost always having rose-colored glasses.
I'm so sick and tired of the refs explaining the calls like this is the NFL.
by Whiter Mage on May 22, 2009 11:14 AM EDT up reply actions
lol wut?
I'm so sick and tired of the refs explaining the calls like this is the NFL.
by Whiter Mage on May 22, 2009 11:21 AM EDT up reply actions
Ernie was eating cookies in the damn bed!!
by DrinkingPartner on May 22, 2009 11:23 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Rec’d
I'm so sick and tired of the refs explaining the calls like this is the NFL.
by Whiter Mage on May 22, 2009 11:24 AM EDT up reply actions
Family Guy reference, unless you’re making a sexual reference with your usage of Italics, there :-).
by DrinkingPartner on May 22, 2009 2:29 PM EDT up reply actions
Its hard to get over the penalties…. I expect that kind of retaliation out of someone like semin, but not our captain, in some of the most important games in team history. As a fan, I would like to see him being a leader somewhere outside the locker room. And as the profile said, results matter. So far, we havnt seen too many. I am one of those calling for his captaincy (I know, a little harsh) but I really think Brooks Laich would do a better job. Then again, isn Brooksie basically the same as Clarkie right before we gave him the "C""? Just saying….
I think calls for his captaincy are premature and unwarranted. All indications are that the organization supports him as captain from the top down, so anything short of him voluntarily (or “voluntarily”) giving it up could have undesirable side effects – it would send a bad message to everyone on the team that if you struggle on the ice, the org’s opinion of your off-ice attributes is subject to change as well.
I do, however, have a problem with his leadership in that when he is struggling, he’s apparently less vocal in his role (I recall Bruce calling him out on it early in the year). That’s not good.
All in all, I could only give him a 2 – he had just about as bad a season as I could imagine him having. Sad, but I’m hopeful that he can have a huge comeback next year, maybe even worthy of a Masterton nomination.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
I do, however, have a problem with his leadership in that when he is struggling, he’s apparently less vocal in his role (I recall Bruce calling him out on it early in the year).
I recall that too, though he’d been dealing with the wrist injury since training camp. I don’t know why the decision to have surgery wasn’t made until February though.
by Bald Pollack on May 22, 2009 7:58 AM EDT up reply actions
“You have to have the leadership in the room to motivate them internally. I know we do have it. It’s just whether anybody is shy about it because [of] their game. A lot of guys won’t do it unless they think their game is going good enough where they can do it. It’s like, ‘How can I stand up and say something if I’m playing like crap?’” – Bruce Boudreau, 11/2/08
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
(Great comment by Pepper on the post with that last quote, too – “I’m beginning to think of Clark as captain the way I thought of Hanlon as coach: the right guy for a particular, transitional time and mix of players, but maybe no longer the right captain for THIS team, now. I don’t know, its still early.”)
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
by J.P. on May 22, 2009 8:01 AM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
As Pepper has schooled me before, naturally I have to defer.
by Bald Pollack on May 22, 2009 8:10 AM EDT up reply actions
Great comment. This gets dicey. Clark’s already been quoted as saying he won’t give it up voluntarily. Which I think was a really bad PR move on his part. I’ve never been part of a locker room, so I can’t offer a valid opinion as to the psychology of changing captains in general.
I’m honestly torn on how to rate him. Obviously, he was a disappointment, maybe worthy of a 3. The way I see it, he really didn’t play this year (even when he was in the lineup), and I feel like “incomplete” should be an option.
I also think that’s the right answer when some idiot reporter asks you the question, regardless of what you’re actually going to do.
by Gould Old Days on May 22, 2009 9:14 AM EDT up reply actions
Yeah, bad question. I mean, what else is the captain gonna say – that he doesn’t give a crap about the honor?
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
No, but the way I read it was along the lines of they’d have to “pry it out of my cold, dead hands”. I agree, questions are often stupid. Sometimes, I think that’s as much a result of needing something to report to the 24/7 information cycle. I guess I’d have been looking for a somewhat more diplomatic “no”.
Having watched Clark on interviews, I think he probably said it with a halfway sardonic smile. It just doesn’t come off as well on paper.
by Gould Old Days on May 22, 2009 10:30 AM EDT up reply actions
No, but the way I read it was along the lines of they’d have to "pry it out of my cold, dead hands".
What’s Kolzig got to do with this?
by Bald Pollack on May 22, 2009 10:30 AM EDT up reply actions
I agree that Clark served his purpose well but that his time might be up. It’s gotta be hard to be a real leader when you can’t play. While he probably has some great insights from the press-box, it’s just not the same.
But even if he is no longer the best guy for the job, I’m not sure how he relinquishes the role at this point.
Even having said that, you can see the effects of a coach far greater than the effects of a Captain, and if the players feel that they are being led properly, who the HELL are we to say they aren’t?
I'm so sick and tired of the refs explaining the calls like this is the NFL.
by Whiter Mage on May 22, 2009 11:16 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
right. i rec’d both your comment and SP’s. it’s fun to speculate, and we can all try to imagine the locker room dynamic from the hundreds of interviews we’ve seen with these guys…but really it’ll be up to the players and if the players stand by clark then that’s that.
by Natty Bumppo on May 22, 2009 11:25 AM EDT up reply actions
The problem with that statement is that you can say the same thing about children: just because they want and NEED candy for dinner doesn’t mean you’re going to give it to them. I’ve gone on record here calling for Ovechkin to step up to the C, and have been beaten down repeatedly in favor of Laich. I think we all see that the leadership structure needs a change, but I’m not sure that they do.
by DrinkingPartner on May 22, 2009 11:29 AM EDT up reply actions
I don’t think I see it. As long as the players and coach are happy with the captain, then I’m happy with it, and I’ve only seen one quote to the contrary. If there were more, I’d see a more fervent need.
I'm so sick and tired of the refs explaining the calls like this is the NFL.
by Whiter Mage on May 22, 2009 11:30 AM EDT up reply actions
but a real leader isn’t told to step up…he just steps up (or down, as the case may be.)
by Natty Bumppo on May 22, 2009 11:30 AM EDT up reply actions
The problem with that statement is that you can say the same thing about children: just because they want and NEED candy for dinner doesn’t mean you’re going to give it to them.
Except that in your example the adult knows more about the situation than the children, both in terms of details and the big picture. As applied to Clark, the Caps players and organization know far more about the details of his leadership, and the big picture (overall effect on the team). Us discussing the merits of Clark’s leadership is more analogous to a group of children discussing the health merits of candy than your example.
I recall that too, though he’d been dealing with the wrist injury since training camp. I don’t know why the decision to have surgery wasn’t made until February though.
Because Clark is one of the toughest SOBs out there and nobody knew how bad it was. It’s something I’ve always admired in Clark, but I think his toughness was almost a bad quality this year — it meant he booked far more minutes than he should have. There’s something to be said for judgment too, and if you’re not getting it done, you need to know enough to get off the ice.
With all that said, anyone who reads this site knows I’m a big Clark fan. I still see what he could be and what it could mean to the team. When healthy, he’s everything everyone things the team is missing in a RW. Talk about square peg in a square hole.
It’s why I paid Clark a big compliment and gave him a 2. My expectations were high. They still are. He hasn’t met them for two years. Clark really needs to get himself right this offseason. And then he could be one hell of an asset next year.
by Gould Old Days on May 22, 2009 9:20 AM EDT up reply actions
The same could be said for Green in the playoffs. He clearly wasn’t performing, and he should have recognized that he needed to step down and get a 100% healthy body in his place. AO made the right decision, though (and I’m betting he’s in a world of pain and soreness right now), simply due to his ability to continue to contribute. Clark’s no different: he just didn’t want to let his teammates down.
by DrinkingPartner on May 22, 2009 11:31 AM EDT up reply actions
Agreed. 52 needed to sit too… IMO… but the question remains, was there a better alternative? (maybe defensively, but at least in the beginning, 52’s offensive ability plays into the minds of other coaches/teams as well… so that might count for something)
That certainly plays into the mental factor of psyching other teams out, but the Pens solved the puzzle in the first game and made mince meat of him. They knew he was hurt, and destroyed him. BB/Green should have recognized that.
by DrinkingPartner on May 22, 2009 11:37 AM EDT up reply actions
Im not necessarily calling for his captaincy. Im just saying that once his contract is up signing him back is not going to be a shoe-in. We have the right players in the organization to replace him as a player and as a captain. But you’re right; He needs to be a leader no matter how he personally is doing. Thats what it really takes to be a captain
Bear in mind that the captaincy is a team decision, which would presumably include people in the room as well. Stripping it from one guy and giving it to a “popular” player could cause locker room issues, and this is a guy who’s signed for two more years.
I gave him a 3 which might be a little generous, but the asterisk is kind of built into the vote. If he gives you 1-5-6 on 32 healthy games then I’m all for revisiting this discussion and his leadership role.
by Bald Pollack on May 22, 2009 7:52 AM EDT up reply actions
Anyone who provided playoff scoring will get a positive number from me.
Despite how gritty Clark is, I don’t think it’s really translated onto the team. I think he should be replaced, but it don’t think it will happen.
I thought we were only reviewing players that played a significant number of games for the Caps this year?
Heh..with that said, I gave him a 1. Not playing, and playing poorly in his few opportunities just about defines the worst I could expect out of him.
I actually had forgotten about Clark when thinking about next year. IF he can get healthy, and if he can STAY healthy, he just might have a place on this team. We keep talking about needing to bring in grit, a bigger player who can cause traffic in front of the net. Well, here is one that has a proven track record when healthy. Clark is one of the few guys on this team who I think would have an honest chance of earning a 10 on these reviews next year. If he is still here. I hope it happens.
by HateOffSeason on May 22, 2009 10:14 AM EDT up reply actions
on the bright side: didn’t his absence actually help the team stay under the salary cap for much of the year? this is where i step back and admit that i don’t know the #’s.
by Natty Bumppo on May 22, 2009 11:07 AM EDT up reply actions
I still maintain a desire to see a perfectly healthy Clark up on the top line with Ovie and Backs simply because he and Ovechkin have worked well together in the past. Not to mention, if Clark actually is healthy, there’s no reason he won’t be able to pot another 30 while playing with Backs and Ovie. He can be a garbage goal, goalie screening guy (provided Ovie doesn’t hit him in the ear, again) that can help them. I’d at least like to see it a few times before it gets dismissed.
by DrinkingPartner on May 22, 2009 11:35 AM EDT up reply actions
That being said… while I agree… there are probably numerous other guys, that fit that bill that can be had for cheaper, and younger… OV and Backs do 90% of the work for said player.
but available…? I don’t think there are that many.
by DrinkingPartner on May 22, 2009 1:07 PM EDT up reply actions
I’m not necessarily calling for his captaincy, however, he definately needs to start letting his actions create more noise than his words. As you mentioned, 2 years ago he was a go-to-the-crease type player, and chipped in 30 goals. The last 2 years, he wasn’t doing that. Perhaps he was trying to play while injured, but who knows? He definately needs to take a step back this summer and take a look at why he was given the right to be team captain of this squad, and come back in the fall full-force and be a motivation to his teammates.
I need 100% of you guys to give 110% 100% of the time.
he definately needs to start letting his actions create more noise than his words.
Frankly, I’m not sure he delivered on either with any consistency this past season.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
I expected at least 20 goals
and got dip sh!t. I have almost forgotten who he even is. I gave him a 2, on the word of all those players who said “He is Our Leader” blah blah blah like okay he had some positive influence in the “room”.
On the other side of the coin, stupid thoughtless selfish retaliatory penalties in the playoffs is not leading. (And playing while hurt and ineffective in the earlier parts of the season . . . how many wins did that cost us I wonder?)
It’s a shame. I feel bad for Clarkie. It’s a nearly untenable situation that he’s in here. I feel even more sad when I hear him say something like "Whether Clark would consider giving up his captainship — “I would do it if they asked but it means so much to me they’d probably have to tear it out of my hands,” he said." (Wise, WaPo, May 16)
He still so wants to help. [shaking head] Can he? In what capacity? Fourth line? Limited ice time?
The value of the Captaincy is one of those urban myths of hockey. Everyone seems to think it’s so important because they get to wear that big C on their jersey, but whenever you ask the players if the Captain gave them a big rousing speech, they always say no. The Caps won 50 games this year and set a club record in points while Clark spent the season in the press box. Then when he came back they threw a clunker in game 7 against the Pens. I doubt Clarkie had much to do with either. So much for the value of who wears the C. This is where you need a cold, dispassionate GM. Clarkie is a great guy, the players seem to love him but he’s 33, he’s always hurt and he doesn’t produce when he is on the ice. I love the fact that he showed faith in the Caps and resigned for under market value, but after next season the Caps will need his roster spot and his money. Let him finish out next season and keep the C. If he manages to produce, then you consider offering him a short-term deal at a reduced price. If he doesn’t produce or there are better youngsters waiting in the minor, then it’s time to part ways. Once he retires, I can see him back with the Caps as an assistant coach.
A good captain can, and will, help his team. He will keep the highs from getting too high, the lows from getting too low. He helps keep the focus on what actually matters. It may not be with a rah-rah speech, but it will happen.
I agree that we probably put too much emphasis on the value of the “big C” but great leaders play a huge role when there isn’t much to differentiate two teams. Teams can certainly succeed in all sorts of ways without a strong captain/veteran leader (see the 08-09 Caps, Bruins) but a strong captain will push the good teams into the realm of great.
I believe you just described Alex Ovechkin. Leaders lead because others will follow them. They don’t need a letter. Let’s face it, Chris got the C because he stood up and believed in the team when not a lot of other players did. It was his reward for being a good soldier. But it’s hard to keep the guys up and motivated when you’re stuck in the press box .
i love the guy, i’ve wear his jersey.
that being said…imagine if we had won the stanley cup this year…gary bettman comes out and says “Chris Clark, come get the cup”? does that seem right to anyone??
unless he immediately did one of those slide-the-beer-down-the-bar things with the cup to Ovechkin it would seem weird…i’d love for him to stay but we need to acknowledge (with the “c”) the person who truly sets the tone for the team’s success.
I think that “sets the tone for the team’s success” isn’t always true for every captain. Jeff Halpern was captain of Captials team with Peter Bondra and Jaromir Jagr. Arguably, the Caps were going to live and die by those guys (and Olie) and not so much Halpern. I think that you can lead the team and set a tone of hard work and dedication without necessarily being most responsible for the teams success.
The Caps have tended towards a “blue collar” identity and I think their Captain’s have reflected that. While I agree that Clark probably isn’t the best guy at the moment, I can see why he was picked for it at the time, but the team’s identity has changed drastically with the rise of the “young guns” and I don’t think it will be long before the captain reflects that.
Looking at the full list of Caps captains, Adam Oates seems to be the most “finesse” guy that has ever been a captain, though Hatcher put up some good numbers in his own right:
1975-1976: Bill Clement
1976-1978: Yvon Labre
1978-1979: Guy Charron
1979-1982: Ryan Walter
1982-1992: Rod Langway
1992-1994: Kevin Hatcher
1994-1999: Dale Hunter
1999-2001: Adam Oates
2001-2003: Steve Konowalchuk
2003-2006: Jeff Halpern
2006-Present: Chris Clark
It is a shame that Hands of Cement was the first captain given the disdain he has displayed towards the city and organization.
by Moonage Daydream on May 22, 2009 11:09 AM EDT up reply actions
Correct. And here’s all you ever could want to know about the hockey career of Doug Mohns.
by Stephen Pepper on May 22, 2009 11:49 AM EDT up reply actions
It hurt like Hell, but Clark got a 1 from me. I put his 10 at a 30 goal, 35 assist season where he plays 80 games and takes less than 70 PIMs. A 5, my expectations, were 10 goals, 15 assists. On the ice, Clark was little more than a liability this year, despite my tries to deny it. I have no clue what he does off the ice, but I’m not going to pretend I Know better than anyone in the locker room. And I presume if it was a problem, we’d hear more about it from disgruntled folks.
I'm so sick and tired of the refs explaining the calls like this is the NFL.
I think 30 goals would have to merit more than a 10 if possible. You realize only 39 guys scored 30 or more goals this year. That isn’t even 2 per team. Do you think that Clark is really that kind of scorer? 20 goals would probably be more realistic for a 10.
by HateOffSeason on May 22, 2009 11:05 AM EDT up reply actions
Clark’s stats from 06-07 : 74 games, 30 goals, 24 assists, 66 PIMs, 16 Power play points, and 4 shorthanded goals. The fact that he’s done it before makes me think that yes, he is.
I'm so sick and tired of the refs explaining the calls like this is the NFL.
by Whiter Mage on May 22, 2009 11:08 AM EDT up reply actions
How many other players scored over 30 goals that year. I’m not sure what happened this year, but it seems like the scoring has been more spread out with fewer high scoring players.
by HateOffSeason on May 22, 2009 11:17 AM EDT up reply actions
I’m saying that for a 10,
on a scale of 1-10 (10 being the best) based on his performance relative to his potential and your expectations for the season – if he had the best year you could have imagined him having, give him a 10; if he more or less played as you expected he would, give him a 5 or a 6; if he had the worst year you could have imagined him having, give him a 1.
I'm so sick and tired of the refs explaining the calls like this is the NFL.
by Whiter Mage on May 22, 2009 11:19 AM EDT up reply actions
42 players had 30 or more goals during the 06-07 regular season, another 6 had 29. Two teams had 4 players with 30+ (Buffalo and Carolina), 6 teams had 3, including the Caps – AO, Semin, Clark – 9 teams had two and 4 teams had 1.
Nice research. Maybe I’m in the wrong here. It appears he could score that many.
In that case, if he can be a net presense, or if anybody can, do more of Ovechkin’s shot hit the net next year because he knows someone is there to get the rebound? ie- he doesn’t have to make the perfect shot every time to create a score?
by HateOffSeason on May 22, 2009 11:48 AM EDT up reply actions
If he does what he did that year (i.e. crash the net with abandon) he can do it. Question is, does Boudreau’s system lend itself to that? Only 9 of those 30 were on the PP. I don’t know enough about “systems” to know if this is even a valid question, but i’d think he can (assuming he can stay healthy).
A 3....
I hate to give it to him, but it was a very disappointing season for Clark. No other word can describe it. Injuries aside, if he’s a 20 goal guy, then if he plays 40% of the games he should get 8… he got 1. He got one goal in 14 playoff games, where it is harder to score.
I am not going to say anything about whether or not he should be the captain next season. I know that Clark will make that decision himself this offseason and do what he thinks is best for the Caps, whether its giving up the C or not. I think we should not expect Clark to become a 20-30 goal guy again, and instead expect him to evolve his game into being a checking/defensive forward. I think he can adjust.
If he chooses to give up the “C”, does it go to Ovie? I suspect if Fedorov doesn’t return, it does, but if Feds comes back for one more year, does he become the captain if Clark gives it up… and if Clark does give it up, does he get an “A” (I think he should…)
Let's go Caps!
If he gives it up, my best guess is it goes to Laich or Ovechkin. And I don’t think either would be bad, but I just feel bad about how lately, our captaincy has been a curse for either the player leaving or spending his entire time as captain injured.
I'm so sick and tired of the refs explaining the calls like this is the NFL.
by Whiter Mage on May 22, 2009 10:53 AM EDT up reply actions
Not a chance, IMHO. He’s a solid vet, respected for his experience, but seems a bit aloof to me. I don’t see him as a galvanizing presence.
I also don’t see him finishing his career here. I doubt they’d consider him unless they really wanted him another 4 years.
by DrinkingPartner on May 22, 2009 2:47 PM EDT up reply actions
I wouldn’t be disappointed by that. He leads by example in terms of work ethic and effort, and is definitely someone I would follow into battle.
However, I do think that the Captain should be capable of fairly significant on-ice production. Sorry to use a Wiki source, but here is a list of current NHL captains. Clark, by far, is the least productive Captain, as would Bradley be. The Captain shouldn’t be someone buried on the 4th (or maybe even the 3rd) line, cheerleading from the bench.
I disagree with that mantra. Make the best leader your captain. The “Best player who is also a leader” argument is garbage.
I'm so sick and tired of the refs explaining the calls like this is the NFL.
Well, 29 out of 30 teams disagree with you, and I think they’re on to something.
If these traits (#1-being a team captain, and #2-contributing on the field/ice/court of play to your team’s success) were mutually exclusive, then the Caps might as well sign Norman Schwartzkopf and have him give speeches before the game.
That’s the way the world works. In business, sports, the military, you name it, the best strategists/tacticians/players who have the ability to inspire and lead their peers are usually chosen as the leader of the group.
I don’t want the most likeable guy, the coolest dude, or the one who tell the best stories at the bar to be my leader. That is garbage. I want someone who shows me how its done, motivates me when needed, and isn’t afraid to speak up and hold people accountable.
Then he should have gotten a 5 :3 A ten is for a player who flat out exceeds your expectations. Although, it seems each person kind of puts their own rating schemes into this and doesn’t follow that, so it’s cool. Also, cynicism is fine, but definitely not fair to the player. If he was just sucking, I could see it’s merit, but he’s obviously not healthy. No need to take pot shots at a guy who’s heart is as big as Clark. The heart is there – the body is not.
I'm so sick and tired of the refs explaining the calls like this is the NFL.
by Whiter Mage on May 22, 2009 11:06 AM EDT up reply actions
maybe I did rate that wrong… i expected him to have another “splat” of a season… so whatever number represents that, that’s what he should’ve received. (JP, if you can change that, or if I can … feel free to do so)
on to the second part, heart outweighs smarts? if the guy is that injured, he shouldn’t be on the ice. you’re telling me that 16, 20, 48 (osala), or a host of others couldn’t have provided toughness, taken a penalty and not scored w/ any ice time that 17 used?
There’s something to be said for toughness and willingness to play thru injuries, but when it’s hurting the team, as the Captain, you have to know when you shut it down and heal up. so my response is, yes, i feel it is ok to negatively comment on his play, since he felt he was “good enough to go” … he’s “good enough to be judged on his play”
I don’t care if you give the guy a 1, a 10, or a Pi, but yeah, you’ve got a total good point. Smarts should outweigh heart, but it hasn’t for Clark, and it hurts tremendously. I agree with the whole point, and I can’t say I wouldn’t welcome an improvement on him next year.
I'm so sick and tired of the refs explaining the calls like this is the NFL.
by Whiter Mage on May 22, 2009 11:23 AM EDT up reply actions
I love the guy as a person/personality, that’s the problem… he’s exactly the “type” player we need on a 3rd/4th line. veteran, gritty guy…. he’s just not that guy anymore. if he can return to form is somewhat debatable, but i’m totally disgusted anytime I see him on the ice now…
That’s completely fair.
I'm so sick and tired of the refs explaining the calls like this is the NFL.
by Whiter Mage on May 22, 2009 11:31 AM EDT up reply actions
I think everyone is judging him too harshly, he played with a still-healing groin and a bum wrist the entire season. The mere fact he played through that warranted the 6 I gave him.
I am rating based on results not effort. If you find out the Nyls was playing with a terminal disease, does that up his score? Not in my mind.
by Moonage Daydream on May 22, 2009 11:12 AM EDT up reply actions
Oh, we can argue anything here, pendantics, semantics…
For instance, I could argue that his injury affected his play, but I won’t.
But at what point do we adjust player potentials? He played with a secret injury for a while, do we wait til he’s not playing? Do we not count the games he didn’t play as a durability factor? Do we go back and find out when he got injured and compare his performance before and after this point and decide how these performances relate to his potential?
Or do we look back at the season, look at his name and consider what sort of performance that person would have on average for a season, then look at their season and decide if they had a good season or a bad one?
I have recluse myself on Clark. I didn’t have Center Ice til last season. While I’ve been a fan since the early 80’s I missed the two seasons prior to these last two season when I moved from DC. To me he’s this injured guy who doesn’t seem to score a lot and may or may not take dumb penalties while saying they’ll have to fight him to take the ‘C’ away. But I haven’t seen enough of him on the ice as any kind of factor in two years of play for the Caps to determine if their leader who played really well up to 3 season ago had a good or bad year this year.
While playing when less than 100% healthy may show toughness and grit, playing when your skills aren’t there is only hurting the team. I expect more from the C. He couldn’t get the job done and ended up trying too hard and taking stupid penalties.
Not many will question his desire or work ethic, so that is not the issue. But, if you can’t do the job (whether thru injuries or the aging process), it’s time to sit and let others step in. Not doing so drags down the overall product.
on the Captaincy discussion, the problem is, at the base of this franchise, Alex Ovechkin is and always will be the soul of the team. For better or worse, he’s the motor that gets this team going, and he will always be the guy the team looks to when they’re down a game or two in a series, the guy they look to score that tying goal, the guy they look to when they need a big hit, a jump, the guy they take note of when he busts his behind back to stop a clear breakaway, the guy they look to when he blocks shots and does little things that make him better.
I think Clark wearing it is fine if that’s how it is going to be, but Ovechkin is going to be the guy who leads the team whether he wants to or whether it is in his nature or not. At some point in the near future, he will have to take that mantle. He’s the best player, he’s the face of the franchise, and his voice and play will lead the team. The sooner he decides he should do that, and the sooner the happy go lucky Alex turns into the do anything to win, always committed to play defense and doing the little things Alex is the sooner the team wins a Cup.
The Enigma that is Clark
He was brought here, contract and all, to be the crash-banger on the first line. What’d he do with that opportunity when healthy? Everything we could have hoped for.
Since then, he’s just about lost an ear and mouth for this club. When the team needed a battle to rally around, he took his broken arm and went at someone (not very successfully…) He’s battled through a groin issue last year that bumped him off the top line, yet in the games he did play in he was a half-a-point per game guy.
Those of you concerned with his point production this year, remember what lines he was given. Top line duties for only about 2-3 games. Mostly stuck on the 4th or with the rest of the “Snake-bit” crew (Nyls, Flash, Fehr). What kind of production do we expect out of a 3rd/4th line winger? 30 goals? This isn’t Detroit.
In all honesty, if we don’t bring Kozzie back (I’d love to have him back for a pay-cut), Clark’s spot is back on the top line. HE is the Crash/Banger we have been after (and Laich seems to fit well with 28). We’ve got that kind of talent to drive the net (17, 21, 16) we just have to convince the guys that it’s their job (and get 14 off the damn PP!)
I agree completely with this. Also agree with getting 14 off the power play. Where do you put him though? With 17/19/8 and 21/?/28, where do you put Flash? 3rd line or 4th? doesn’t fit. Hershey?
by HateOffSeason on May 22, 2009 1:14 PM EDT up reply actions
Clark, at best, is a third liner. He was playing first line minutes because we had no one else who could fill the role. But his playstyle/talent best puts him on the third.
I'm so sick and tired of the refs explaining the calls like this is the NFL.
by Whiter Mage on May 22, 2009 1:39 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
There aren’t a ton of third liners (Jordan Staal excluded) who have the ability to put up 30 a year, regardless of their teammates. Clark is a utility player who should be able to put up similar numbers, if healthy and playing with AO.
by DrinkingPartner on May 22, 2009 1:50 PM EDT up reply actions
I see Clark and Laich as very similar in this respect. They can do what you need them to.
by Gould Old Days on May 22, 2009 1:59 PM EDT up reply actions
Laich doesn’t have Clark’s shot (circa ‘06-’07), though. I don’t think Laich gets 30 goals on the 1st line. I could be wrong, but I don’t see that happening.
by DrinkingPartner on May 22, 2009 2:06 PM EDT up reply actions
I don't understand...
I could see that argument if he was on the top line and scored 13 goals or something (pains me jab at a player I value highly). When he was on the top line with AO and Zubs, he got himself 30 garbage/deflection/ow-my-ear goals. Someone dig up a shot chart for him from 06/07, I’d be shocked if half of his goals were at/beyond the dots.
To comment on some of the ones below… where do you put flash? Honestly, he’ll probably find his home with semin on the 2nd. I’d LOVE to see a full year of 21/39/10. That might be my favorite line BB’s ever put together.
If the guy can get/stay healthy, he needs to be crashing the net with our best shooters behind him. That’s where his value was in 06/07. His value is clearly not the 3rd/4th line.
No. His value is third line. He’s a forechecking, get in front of the net kind of guy. You can put him on the PP, but he’s not a first liner, and the only reason he got 30 goals was play time and who he was with. I love Clark. He’s a utility guy, best used on the 3rd line, second in a pinch, who can do special teams. I don’t see him as a first liner.
I'm so sick and tired of the refs explaining the calls like this is the NFL.
I’m kinda confused why you don’t want a forechecking, get in front of the net kind of guy on the 1st line. We already have crazy speed and talent in Ovechkin. Time and again we proved that while all skill and talent on the first line can produce goals in a pinch, it had us tearing our hair out the rest of the time becuase there was no sustained pressure (lack of forecheck) and zero defensive accountability from the wingers.
Who cares if the only reason he scored 30 was the guys he played with, its not like he stole the points from them. Which would you rather have:
1. A line with #8 scoreing 50, #28 scoreing 35, and both of them probably about +10 for the season on 5v5 or…
2. A line with #8 scoreing 50, #17 scoring 15, and a 2nd line with #28 still scoring 35.
Now, my argument isn’t really that Clark should definitely be on the 1st line, but someone like him should. Because Ovechkin is so damned good, we can probably get by without it, but if we do, we definitely need it on the 2nd line. The argument that the only line that should forecheck is just faulty.
by HateOffSeason on May 22, 2009 9:01 PM EDT up reply actions
If you love 21/39/10, how would you feel about a year of:
Ovechkin – Backstrom – Semin
Fleischmann – Fedorov – Fehr
Laich – Steckel – Bradley
Bourque – Gordon – Clark
Do you think that’s enough firepower to get it done?
by Gould Old Days on May 22, 2009 6:28 PM EDT up reply actions
Sadly, I too gave him a 3. At this point, a 10 from me would be something in the 25 goals, 30 assists range, a few fights and a lot less dumb minors. Here’s hoping he can stay healthy and return to something close to form.
Because now I can justify browsing and commenting during the work day with the argument that I am promoting my business.
At this point in his career, a 10 from Clarkie would look like this:
25-25-50 (pretty much the average of his career peak), >0 /-, 7-8 PPG, 80-100 PIM (the higher end if Brash isn’t back, ideally lower if he’s not fighting 5-6 times otherwise) – play 70 games with a regular PP time contribution in front of the net.
To get a 5, sadly:
6-9-15 in 50 games (exactly his totals from the last two years. Combined. :\ )
Also, cut out some of the stupid penalties.
-d
Was kind of thinking the same thing. When you think a player is nearly worthless…what are we accomplishing by giving him a 5? Just get rid of this guy, please. Stop with the 30 goal season. He had a career year playing with AO and he maxed out at 30 goals and 54 points. Never happening again.
I say give AO the C now. He might not be quite ready, but he’s here for the next 12 years, can anyone else on this team say that?
Russian Machine Never Breaks
. . . but he’s here for the next 12 years, can anyone else on this team say that?
I surely hope Backie can say that fairly soon.
Sadly, I don’t think we will be seeing a 30 goal season from Clark again, even if he is healthy all season. Bruce’s comments from November concerned me at the time because the team hit a rough patch, Clark wasn’t playing well, and the comment implied that Clark wasn’t comfortable being vocal when he himself wasn’t playing well at a time when leadership was needed. Not sure if his time here has past, but at his salary, he better able to play well for more than 2-4 minutes a game and not take stupid penalties. If management is looking at him as only a fourth line player for next season, there are cheaper options available. He is a gritty player, but has been injured for large chucks of two seasons. If Clark’s contract was up at the end of this season, do you think he would be re-signed?
I’m hoping someone can school me a bit here, but why was everyone expecting so much from Clark? He obviously had injury problems I’m pretty sure we knew he’d take most of the year to work through. I wasn’t expecting much of anything out of him and that’s what I got.
I gave him a 5.
I’d love to see a full, healthy season out of him. I think he could do a 4th line an awful lot of good.
Clark is one of those guys I like even though he hasn’t been productive lately. He spent most of the last two years injured. And this year, we first had the hairline fracture of the hand (Nov/Dec time frame) and then needing surgery for his hand (February).
With the injuries, I felt the Caps should have appointed a new Captain, at least temporarily, but with the caveat that the captaincy would be returned to Clark as soon as he is able to come back.
I recall walking out of the Caps/Red Wings game and, while very happy with the win and some of the line combinations, felt sad that there no longer seemed to be a good role for Clark (unless one of my other favorites was to be a healthy scratch to make room for him.) It seemed that the worst place to be on the Caps at that time was 3rd line right winger (which meant next guy to be healthy scratched.) I recall Clark being scratched that game (I assumed healthy). I actually expected him to be playing the next game vs Ottawa (but he didn’t play). And then the very next day, we learned Clark would be out for the year. BTW, I actually like the other guys who are/were the 2nd and 3rd line right wingers at the time, Fehr and Semin.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Japers' Rink
Related FanShots on Japers' Rink
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recent FanShots
The Vault
In Association With
Latest Puck Daddy - NHL from Yahoo! Sports
- Why the Devils and the Kings are evidence the Capitals shouldn’t trade Alex Ovechkin
- Eulogy: Remembering the 2011-12 New York Rangers
- Stanley Cup Final: 5 keys for New Jersey Devils and Los Angeles Kings
- Friday’s Three Stars: Devils head to Final; Brodeur, Kovalchuk the difference in Game 6
- Devils eliminate Rangers in Game 6, ending fear of the past, setting course for the future
