Report out of New York suggests that long-time Vancouver Canuck captain Markus Naslund is set to retire after another disappointing campaign with the New York Rangers. Naslund is 35 years old.
And immediately, be great debate begins again here in Vancouver: should Naslund’s number be retired? If #19 will be retired, Naslund will join Stan Smyl and Trevor Linden as the third Canuck player to have his jersey hung in the rafters.
If we are to look at the stats, Naslund seems to be a prime candidate to have his jersey retired. After all, he is the all-time leader in career points (756) and goals (346), and is third in career assists (410, 5 behind all-time leader Linden). Naslund’s offensive prowess speaks volume, and is, without a doubt, one of the greatest offensive players the Canucks have ever had.
However, to have a player’s number retired goes beyond the stats. Naslund has often been criticized for the fact that he has never taken the Canucks deep into the playoffs. His later years in a Canucks uniform lead some people to question his commitment to the game. Most importantly, people suggest that Naslund was never the “leader” that captivates and inspires a team’s motivation to go above and beyond what it has talent-wise.
While I do not necessarily agree with the above criticisms on Naslund, especially when it comes to the question of leadership, I must say that I am one of those who don’t think Naslund’s number should be retired. And here’s why:
To retire a player’s number means that, that particular number will never be worn by another player playing for the team. To me, the simplest qualifier for this very special treatment is that the player has done something that would not be repeated by another player. Looking back at Stan Smyl’s career and Trevor Linden’s career, I think I am fairly confident in saying that it would be extremely unlikely to have another player repeat what they have contributed to the team on and off the ice. Naslund’s greatest “mark” with the Canucks is his very strong offensive stats; they would not be repeated or surpassed easily by another player, but I will not say that I don’t expect those records to be broken.
Don’t get me wrong – Naslund has been an exceptional player for the Canucks. He has conducted himself humbly and admirably through his 12 seasons in Vancouver. I don’t, for a second, feel that his humility and quiet demeanor should prevent him from receiving the proper recognition to the contributions he has made for the team. However, having a number retired, to me, is very much like being inducted into the hall-of-fame (only at a local level instead of a league or sport level) – if you have to argue and present your points to convince others of a candidate’s legitimacy, then that player, however wonderful a player or person he is, is not quite hall-of-famer (or, in this case, a jersey-retiring player). I would not have a problem seeing Naslund’s number retired, but if it were up to me to decide, I would not retire #19… that’s all.
I personally felt a little saddened that, when Markus Naslund played his last game as a Canuck on the same night that Trevor Linden played his last, there was no recognition for what Naslund has done. But, true to his humble form, Naslund just stood there quietly, and gave Linden the recognition he rightfully deserved. Give Naslund the recognition and honour that he deserves – I just don’t think retiring his jersey is the more suitable recognition.
And immediately, be great debate begins again here in Vancouver: should Naslund’s number be retired? If #19 will be retired, Naslund will join Stan Smyl and Trevor Linden as the third Canuck player to have his jersey hung in the rafters.
If we are to look at the stats, Naslund seems to be a prime candidate to have his jersey retired. After all, he is the all-time leader in career points (756) and goals (346), and is third in career assists (410, 5 behind all-time leader Linden). Naslund’s offensive prowess speaks volume, and is, without a doubt, one of the greatest offensive players the Canucks have ever had.
However, to have a player’s number retired goes beyond the stats. Naslund has often been criticized for the fact that he has never taken the Canucks deep into the playoffs. His later years in a Canucks uniform lead some people to question his commitment to the game. Most importantly, people suggest that Naslund was never the “leader” that captivates and inspires a team’s motivation to go above and beyond what it has talent-wise.
While I do not necessarily agree with the above criticisms on Naslund, especially when it comes to the question of leadership, I must say that I am one of those who don’t think Naslund’s number should be retired. And here’s why:
To retire a player’s number means that, that particular number will never be worn by another player playing for the team. To me, the simplest qualifier for this very special treatment is that the player has done something that would not be repeated by another player. Looking back at Stan Smyl’s career and Trevor Linden’s career, I think I am fairly confident in saying that it would be extremely unlikely to have another player repeat what they have contributed to the team on and off the ice. Naslund’s greatest “mark” with the Canucks is his very strong offensive stats; they would not be repeated or surpassed easily by another player, but I will not say that I don’t expect those records to be broken.
Don’t get me wrong – Naslund has been an exceptional player for the Canucks. He has conducted himself humbly and admirably through his 12 seasons in Vancouver. I don’t, for a second, feel that his humility and quiet demeanor should prevent him from receiving the proper recognition to the contributions he has made for the team. However, having a number retired, to me, is very much like being inducted into the hall-of-fame (only at a local level instead of a league or sport level) – if you have to argue and present your points to convince others of a candidate’s legitimacy, then that player, however wonderful a player or person he is, is not quite hall-of-famer (or, in this case, a jersey-retiring player). I would not have a problem seeing Naslund’s number retired, but if it were up to me to decide, I would not retire #19… that’s all.
I personally felt a little saddened that, when Markus Naslund played his last game as a Canuck on the same night that Trevor Linden played his last, there was no recognition for what Naslund has done. But, true to his humble form, Naslund just stood there quietly, and gave Linden the recognition he rightfully deserved. Give Naslund the recognition and honour that he deserves – I just don’t think retiring his jersey is the more suitable recognition.
No comments:
Post a Comment