retire #27
by Joe Holub on Aug 8, 2010 6:17 PM PDT
Email
Printwith teem ureturning we once again push back raising number 8 to the rafters but it got me thinkong that the ducks should seriously consider raising 27 to the rafters. he wasnt here tht long but scotty took this franshise from an avg team to consistent plyoff team to cup champion. he lead the team on and off the ice, and im pretty sure leads most of the ducks all time d men records. yes it would be special for teemu to be the first number retired but there are not many players tht had a greater impact on anaheim than scotty. we need to do the right thing and honnor number 27
This article is user-generated. It does not necessarily reflect the views of Anaheim Calling. Please do not link this article as representative of Anaheim Calling content or viewpoints . . . unless it's really really good.
43 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I think doing it says a lot considering the Devils clearly won’t, but I also think the Ducks should be extremely selective with the first number they send up to the rafters. I mean, how many expansion teams (not relocated teams) have retired numbers? One? The Wild, to honor their fans? Even the relocated teams have been fairly scarce on the retirement front with the exception of the Avalanche.
Plus, I’d rather not be the Avalanche, where we send the winners up to the rafters first. What about the guys who stuck out the lean times? Someone representing them should really be retired first. You can’t pretend your franchise started with the guy who made you a winner. You’ve gotta retire Neal Broten before you retire Mike Modano.
by Arthur from Anaheim Calling on Aug 8, 2010 8:07 PM PDT reply actions
that’s not to say the Avalanche had a choice, winning so close to relocation, but I thought Bourque was overkill. Your rafters should be tied to some narrative on your history as limited as that history might be.
by Arthur from Anaheim Calling on Aug 8, 2010 8:08 PM PDT up reply actions
Yeah the Bourqe retiring was a bit much. I don’t mind the ducks retiring 27, but I would like the ducks to set the bar very high with the players whose numbers they retire in terms of on-ice accomplishments as well as times served with the team.
To use another sport as comparison I would like the ducks to handle this the way the Lakers do. Despite having loads of rings and great players they have retired very few numbers compared to the Boston Celtics who have retired a ton.
There's always money in the banana stand
If you guys want to see a really pointless banner, here’s one: http://canucks.nhl.com/club/page.htm?bcid=27665
Some of you might remember this. The Canucks raised a #7 banner to signify the “7th man” (the fans)… and they were planning to honor a fan at the start of every home game.
When they unveiled this project to the fans for the first time, it was met by a stunned and embarrassed silence from 18,000+ fans. Eventually the team silently shelved the idea and nobody ever mentioned it again.
/end random tangent
Heck, do it with them. Maybe a nice montage extra-large banner.
"Ridin’ The Meat Train & Dreaming of Jack’s Johnson All Summer Long!"
http://www.battleofcali.com/
I wouldn't retire 27 just yet.
I would wait til Selanne retires and have Both retired at the same time or at least not have anyone else wear the number 27. Sort of like how the Angels haven’t retired Tim Salmon’s number but haven’t had another player wear the number.
Like so many people, I think no matter what happens, Teemu’s number MUST go first.
#8, #27 and #35 are definitely three numbers that should go up there. I’m still not convinced about #9, unless he comes back and somehow wins over everyone’s hearts again.
Definitely Agree.
8, 27, 35 should definitely go up to the rafters, and we’ll see about 9 . . . if PK does come back, there’s no guarantee that Ryan would give up 9, so, if PK does become popular with the fans again, is may be with another number.
ANGELS . . . DUCKS . . . GOLDEN BEARS
I don’t know about 27 or 35. I don’t think I’d unilaterally reject it, but I’ve been a fan of Anaheim since the 95-96 season and I don’t think of Niedermayer and Giguere as being immediately associated with the franchise. Maybe way farther down the road those numbers should retire. But in the next 5+ years the only numbers I think should be raised are 8 and 9.
Really? Who do you associate Giguere with? Hartford? Calgary? Toronto? I really think he was a great Duck and deserves to have his number retired. Although, he still have a few years left, so we’ll see what happens.
He was a great Duck, and I appreciate everything he did for the franchise. But when you talk about retiring a jersey, I think you’re looking for a guy who really shapes the identity of the team. Sometimes I wonder if Jiggy was that great, or Allaire was that brilliant. Both might be true. Maybe down the road Giguere does get retired. He’s the best goalie in franchise histroy, so far. I think my main concern is that the Ducks are a franchise with only a small history. I think that it’s not uncommon for franchises to try to falsely create that sense of tradition and history by devoting too early to retiring jerseys. 8 and 9 shouldn’t even be questions. They put this franchise on the map. When it comes to other players. I’m just not 100% sure, and I don’t think there’s a harm in reserving judgment for a little while longer.
it’s not uncommon for franchises to try to falsely create that sense of tradition and history by devoting too early to retiring jerseys
I disagree there. As I said above, it’s COMPLETELY uncommon in the NHL. As far as the true expansion teams around the Ducks i.e. the Panthers, the Senators, the Lightning, the Sharks, there’s nary a modern retired jersey amongst them. The Senators lifted a number from the 20s into their rafters. So if the Ducks are going to retire a number, they have to think long and hard about it, because they will be completely uncommon amongst their peers the moment they do it.
by Arthur from Anaheim Calling on Aug 9, 2010 2:32 PM PDT up reply actions
If we retired 4 different jerseys in a span of say 4-5 years, or less, wouldn’t we be accused of trying to create that sense of false history? The Ducks are just barely stepping out of that Disney shadow. Wouldn’t forcing something like this be a step back into it?
That is my ultimate point. We’d be taken less seriously. Maybe that wasn’t as clear as I would have liked.
ultimate point aside, your statement about the practice of retiring jerseys in the NHL is false. By the standards of what teams have actually done, us retiring ONE jeresey in the next year would be excessive. There is no truly NEW team in the NHL falsely creating a sense of tradition by rushing into retiring jerseys. The Ducks would be the first.
by Arthur from Anaheim Calling on Aug 9, 2010 8:28 PM PDT up reply actions
I’m sorry, how does retiring a number contribute to a false sense of history if it actually happened? And what should be the standard for jersey retirement? Is Colorado any less of a franchise for retiring Bourque? I don’t think so. It might be a bit much, but if they want to honor a player who contributed to their franchise, why can’t they?
I really don’t see how after 6 years of being out of the Disney shadow, we would go back into it by retiring 4 guys who have contributed so greatly to this franchise.
There's nothing to see here. And nothing gazes back at me.
I’ll put it this way. Of the old WHA teams, only the Oilers remain with their original logo and team history intact. Many people look down on numbers retired by the Whalers, Nordiques and Jets as coming from a different league with such a limited sense of history that they were willing to play games with their number retirements, raising people like John McKenzie into the rafters or retiring the numbers of people who built NHL history before coming to the WHA (a stunt not unlike what happened with Bourque and the Avs, where you borrow another organization’s history to aggrandize your own limited one). An expansion team doing it prematurely would be looked on no differently.
by Arthur from Anaheim Calling on Aug 10, 2010 4:32 PM PDT up reply actions
Then who decides when it isn’t premature? It seems like it’s all based on opinion and there’s no concrete standard to adhere to
There's nothing to see here. And nothing gazes back at me.
of course there’s no concrete standard, but think about what it says that the Ducks put a name into the rafters before the Sharks, the Senators, the Lightning and the Panthers. Maybe the Florida franchises haven’t had franchise players and maybe the Sharks will raise Marleau and the Sens will put up Alfredsson in due course, but think about what it would say for us to be first and for our first to be Niedermayer.
If it weren’t for the fact that Lou isn’t going to do it in NJ, I’m sure people will look down on it the way they would if the Lightning retired Andreychuk’s number or if the Sharks retired Rob Blake’s. Like it or not, as no new team has really done it, it will be scrutinized, and heavily.
by Arthur from Anaheim Calling on Aug 10, 2010 8:18 PM PDT up reply actions
So what? There’s an unwritten rule that the expansion teams can’t retire jerseys now? I don’t think 27 should be in the rafters before 8, but I don’t think anyone has a case to make against what 27 did for this franchise (if it were to be retired).
There's nothing to see here. And nothing gazes back at me.
As I’ve said before, Niedermayer might have been a very impactful player, but that doesn’t make him part of the history of the Ducks. I don’t think he’s a key element of the Ducks’ narrative, at least not yet.
The guy played 17 full NHL seasons. Only 5 of them were in Anaheim. That’s about 1/3. The story of Scotty’s career is more about what he did before he was here than what he did when he was here. I think Arthur has explained it pretty well, though. Retiring 27 would be like San Jose retiring Blake’s number. He was successful here, and important to our franchise, but I don’t know if he’s jersey retiring material. It would seem hollow to me.
Andreychuk was good for the Lightning. They even got a Cup. Do you really think no one would scoff if they put his jersey up there?
There’s not a rule against expansion teams doing it but there aren’t rules against a lot of things and people still refrain from doing them because a sense of decorum is implied. Seriously, none of the 20 year old teams are rushing to do this, but the relocated WHA teams have been pretty fast and loose with raising numbers to the rafters. I think that says plenty.
My case against Niedermayer would be that he’s a Devil. Bourque won Colorado a Cup, Andreychuk won Tampa a Cup and Gordie Howe finished his career with Hartford, but we consider those players a Bruin, a Sabre and a Red Wing. It sucks that the Devils don’t respect Niedermayer, but would you be surprised if he wanted to go into the hall of fame as a Devil, with little or no mention of his time with the Ducks beyond a picture of him handing the Cup to his brother? The guy’s a Devil.
by Arthur from Anaheim Calling on Aug 10, 2010 9:40 PM PDT up reply actions
I’m not arguing that the guy should be known for his career in Anaheim more than New Jersey. But the reason I think he deserves to have his number in the rafters at Honda Center is because he was the most important piece of earning Anaheim’s only Cup. His impact to this team is right behind Teemu and Paul (even though Paul hasn’t earned Anaheim the Cup, yet).
To me, the length of time he spent here compared to when he was with the Devil’s shouldn’t be relevant in regards to discussing jersey retirement. The most important aspect should be the player’s impact on the team’s history and I don’t think there’s much to argue against the impact that he’s had. The dude captained the team for 4 seasons (I think), won the Cup, got the Smythe, and made this team playoff contenders in every season with the franchise (besides the last). Other than Paul, Teemu, and maybe Jiggy, you’ll have a hard time finding someone else who’s had a greater impact.
There's nothing to see here. And nothing gazes back at me.
I can’t think of too many players where impact on team history or championship impact regardless of tenure was the factor in the number retirement. Probably just Bourque with Colorado and Messier with New York, but both those players had the number retired by their original franchises as well. Someone helping you win a championship is rarely the factor in retiring a number. It certainly doesn’t trump tenure and the fact that when people look at a player, they associate him with only one organization. I mean, Brett Hull’s number flies in St. Louis, not Dallas or Detroit or anywhere he actually won the Cup.
Your standard, while a nice sentiment, would mean that Andreychuk belongs in the Tampa rafters, and I just don’t think that’s a popular opinion. Numbers are usually retired by the franchise with whom the player had the longest tenure. If the Devils don’t retire Niedermayer’s number, they suck as an organization, but it’s not common for another franchise to step in and retire the number because the player’s original franchise won’t. It’s certainly not a discussion the Ducks should be having before they’ve sent a single number up the rafters.
by Arthur from Anaheim Calling on Aug 11, 2010 12:21 AM PDT up reply actions
and I’m not saying they should have ridiculously high standards like the Senators set with Frank Finnigan, but god willing, if a franchise sticks around long enough, it will NEVER be defined by one player. Only young franchises are defined by a single player. So, what you often see in retired numbers are players who are defined by one team. You close your eyes and you see Hull wearing that Blues jersey, sniping down to one knee in his prime. I close my eyes and I see Nieds wearing the red tail, and I always will.
by Arthur from Anaheim Calling on Aug 11, 2010 12:28 AM PDT up reply actions
I’d put up 27, but would like to wait a while. Before Scott we were a sub par team and his leadership was outstanding!!!! He’s still involved in the club which I think says alot and as fans many of us felt comfortable just calling him the “Captain”.
If he sticks around for a while and does a lot of behind the scenes work, his number should probably go up. As it stands now, I’m not so sure.
by Daniel AC on Aug 9, 2010 1:48 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Holy ish… spell check is an amazing feature which this author should’ve used.
Anyway, I agree that the Ducks should retire the number, but not for at least another 2-3 years.
Maybe he posted it from his phone.
by Arthur from Anaheim Calling on Aug 10, 2010 11:25 AM PDT up reply actions
I’m iffy on 9 going up, but a return would def go a long way on that. 9, 35, and 27 belong there. All 3 of those men changed the face of the franchise, along with Kariya. Paul scorned us though, so he’ll have to try to refresh his standing. Jiggy defined what makes our Duck goalies so special. No matter what though, 8 goes up first, and we don’t raise Scotty if the Devs do. Besides, it sounds like he wants to stay in the organization. Let’s work on getting Coach Nieds
UNRELATED: Handel is the most overrated composer ever...
by Bleys on Aug 11, 2010 11:04 AM PDT via mobile reply actions
I’d actually be against having Nidermayer Coach. Very seldom does a great player become a great coach. This goes for all sports too.
The biggest problem for these great players becoming coaches is teaching their players how to do something. Because the great players have an innate ability to perform certain things on the ice (field, court, whatever), it’s hard for them to be able to teach that. They’re just able to do that.
For all intents and purposes, it comes down to the player asking their coach, “How do you do that?” And the coach would respond, “What do you mean ‘how do you do that?’ You just do.”
The perfect examples are Wayne Gretzky and Magic Johnson in two completely different sports. They were just terrible coaches because they couldn’t teach the natural gifts that they had. They just were able to do the things they could do without thinking.
I think it depends on the position played more than the caliber of the player, with Magic being more the exception than the rule. Players who play positions that force them to think about the game tend to make better coaches. Catchers, defenseman, guards, are all examples of this…I think. I’m a speech coach, and to an extent, I agree with you. There are different events in speech and I was naturally good at some and had trouble with others. When I coach, I’m better at coaching the events I wasn’t naturally gifted at, because I had to learn how to do it. However, I’m still pretty good at coaching the other events, because I know exactly what it should look and feel like. Through trial and error, you can still make it work.
Glad you can speak from actual experience. But at the pro level, you don’t really get a chance for trial and error. I’m actually surprised that Gretzky lasted as long as he did. But that’s Phoenix and it probably wouldn’t have really mattered for their revenue if they were winning or losing (see last year vs. years before).
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
SBNation.com Recent Stories
CK Photo Galleries
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
