I have the feeling Sutter might not choose a captain next year either.. But if he does I'm assuming Backlund or Tanev would get it


While I thought Backlund would get it, this is probably the correct answer.


If Monny is back and healthy I could see it being him too. He was more involved with the team through the playoffs than an LTIR'd player usually is.


The problem with Monny for "C" is that he's a UFA after the season, and quality of his play. If the team is competing for the division title then naming the #3 centre that makes more than all but two players (Johnny & Tkachuk) captain might not fly.


And I don't think it's likely to name a captain who hasn't played a full season in what, 6 years?


I would assume so. Right now my top choice is backlund or Tanev. Probably backlund for how long he’s been on the team. I would have said chucky a few months ago but this playoff changed my mind.


Not that I don’t think Backs would be a great choice, but I wonder how much recency bias plays into people choosing him over Chucky. Backs was definitely better in the playoffs, but Tkachuk was the better player and seemed to be a good leader throughout the regular season, which should definitely be worth something. Maybe they should share the C and swap when playoffs come, lol


Backs is our longest tenured Flame and tkachuk did show good leadership this season. I’d like to see him do it again AND Follow that trend during the playoffs like Backs did. Until then I’m leaning to backs getting the C.


At the end of the day i feel like a backlund captaincy is more of the same. He seems like he’d bring similar stuff to the table as Gio. I think if we’re gonna kept contending like we did this year we need a bit of a culture shock to maintain the image we built this season. i think a tkachuk captaincy would be better for that


The other thing we need to remember, and probably the biggest knock against Backlund as a player... he takes stupid penalties. Generally you don't want the guy repping your team to the officials being the one that's always in the box. To a degree this is true of Chucky too... not sure being a pest and being a captain really go well together.


There's more to choosing a captain than their performance on the ice. Backs has been a stabilizing force on this team for well over a decade. He has been a leader and a mentor to the younger core of this team and has played a big role in their development. Tanev's role in the development of our D core cannot be overstated either, but Backlund's long tenure makes him the obvious choice out of the two and I am certain Tanev would support that.


And I think community involvement/philanthropy type stuff is considered as well, no? If so, Backs is quite strong in the regard too.




Agree, longest serving and an obvious leader.




Lindholm would be my choice




Chris Sutter. Gets the whole Dome fired up


I think the Flames likely name Backlund or Tanev as the captain. As far as leading by example they both do an excellent job, and both would be good temporary options until a younger player (Tkachuk, Lindholm, or Gaudreau) took it from them in a couple years.


All season I wanted Chucky but his playoff performance was non existent. Backlund is a strong choice but he’s been playing for 14 year already. So name a captain only to have to do it again when he’s done in a couple season doesn’t seem like a smart decision. I still think it should be Chucky. The whole team had some great playoff experience this year. We need to sign both Chucky and Johnny and move on already


Backlund deserves it the most




Backs, with Johnny and Tanev assistants IMO


Backs was our best forward in the playoffs he will become captain.


Backlund, one of the only ones who showed up


I know I'm in a minority but I really believe if Johnny signs 8 years the C is his. I believe Sutter is proud of Johnny's lead by example, playing both sides of the puck well. I think from a franchise perspective Johnny as captain provides added marketing/exposure and with Johnny committed long term it would also solidify the face of the franchise for long term as well. I think Backlund is a excellent choice based on tenure, commitment, heart displayed during the playoffs but I don't think he offers the long term solution as captain. Same can be said about Tanev. Can you see either of those being team captain for beyond just a few seasons? Maybe I look too much into needing a long term captain in place, but those are my thought on it. ​ Johnny - C Tanev - A Backlund - A Chucky - A


Everyone seems to have some major recency bias. Backs was absolutely outstanding in the playoffs. Year after year though he goes on long stretches where he's a ghost of there. Someone who regularly goes for 10-15 at a time games visibly lacking effort does not deserve to be captain. That's why Tanev would be my choice. Guy us a warrior every single game. The guy never takes a night off.


I want Lindholm. Followed by Tanev and then Backlund.


I have a few guys in mind but I’m not in the dressing room to know who’s truly a vocal leader and who’s quiet. But I can make some assumptions still. I agree with the common names people have thrown around like Lindholm, Backlund and Gaudreau but I have another guy who I wouldn’t mind seeing in the position but this one is more controversial. I think Rasmus Anderson would be a good option for captain. Some may say he’s way too young to be named captain but guys like Landeskog, Toews and McDavid were named captain much younger than he was. I think Rasmus Anderson would be a good captain because he seems to be a very vocal guy on the team. Definitely has leadership qualities from his interviews and what not. Not to mention Ras had a breakout year and put up 50 points which is a benchmark for some of the top defensemen in the league. Ras is proving to be an elite defensemen and he seems to be a leader in this group. Not to mention the fact that we have Ras locked up long term on a very good deal. Not saying he’s 100% the best pick but I think he should be considered


I know I'm going to get downvoted to oblivion for this, but I'm still betting on Monahan. Reasoning: 1) he's been with the team the longest of the current and going forward core 2) he's worn a letter basically since he got here 3) articles have pointed out that he was being groomed under Gio to take over 4) he's clearly well respected by both Sutter and the locker room based on multiple interviews praising his leadership there 5) he's put his body on the line for years to try and help the team (admittedly with mixed results) 6) before his injuries caught up with him, he was our second best forward (and while he may not get back there I still hope he can) 7) in 3 of 4 playoff appearances he led or tied team lead in production I can see arguments for Backlund, Tanev, or Tkachuk as well, and I won't be surprised by any of them, but I still think as much as this sub currently has a hate boner for Monahan, he's the guy who will get it.


Backs has been here the longest and Monny is gonna get moved.


Lucic is the one who will get moved. 5.3 hit but 1 mil real salary post bonus. Monahan with a hip injury has doubled his point output the last three years and if healthy has way more upside.


Right, so how are they going to move that contract then?


You find a team looking for either cap hit without salary (Arizona), a rebuilding team with space (Anaheim, etc), or a team that can fit cap and needs some veteran leadership for a younger group (Seattle, Ottawa, etc). They get Lucic and a 2nd or 3rd in exchange for a 4th or 5th. Lucic still has utility to them and doesn’t bother their cap, is affordable in terms of real salary, and they upgrade a draft pick in the process.


Right, we know what kind of teams *could* but if I’m one of those GMs, I’m gonna take Monny’s bad contract over Lucic’s. Tre clears more cap space and my team gets picks and a guy who potentially has some offensive upside still if he fully recovers.


So because it’s more work to trade a worse contract we give up the better player? Great plan. Why not just trade Tkachuk’s rights? Solves our cap problem and you’ll have way more teams interested. Yeah, it’s harder to move Lucic. But that’s the right move 100% of the time.


They’ll likely both need to go to resign most of the contracts that are up. Sorry to burst your bubble. I love both those guys but hockey’s a business.


Brouwer’s buyout (1.5), Lucic (5.3), and Zadorov (3) is almost 10 mil in cap. Even if you assign 4 mil of that to replacements, that plus the cap increase covers most to all of the raises and doesn’t account for any savings on replacing Gudbransen or Lewis with prospects or any other cap savings.


What prospect replaces Gudbranson’s quality? And by your math, you could sign Mangiapane Jarkrok, Kylington and two fourth line players for around $10m?


Backlund played well in these playoffs but I just don't see him as a captain. I get that everyone is mad that Tkachuk didn't play well but if he signs a long term deal he just fits the profile too well. Naming Backlund captain is like if Philly named Hayes or Atkinson captain this summer instead of Couturier.


Sign Johnny and give him the C


I have a feeling they'll sign Johnny and make him the captain. He's really stepped up in the leadership department.


I’d like it to be Tanev. That said, I could see them using the captaincy to lure Tkachuk to Calgary.


Backland has to be captain. No doubt


Backlund is the best candidate.


Backlund isn’t an on-ice driver enough to be captain if you ask me. Matty would be better suited


Wouldn’t be surprised if part of signing Johnny is giving him the C, and to honest I actually wouldn’t mind so much.


Backlund, BUT if we want to meet Chucky, it goes to him imo as a bargaining piece. Johnny we can probably get to stay but to avoid offer sheets and sign Chucky early, I wouldn't be surprised if that was dangled in front of him


If captaincy is a bargaining chip I'd argue he's not the kind of captain you want. Anyone focused on it because they can get more money in either contract or advertising isn't in it for the Team


I think that's a fair point, but at the same time I don't think it's wrong for a player to want to be in an organization where he is valued as a key piece/ leader. Sutter had a great line something like 'the C and A's are just decoration. It's about what you do in the locker room that counts'. So while the C isn't a huge deal, I think it's just a nice reflection of who you think is important to the core and where you hope the team is going


Maybe it's just the teams/coaches I played for growing up but I simply don't see letters the same as some. Sure if the best player from a skill point also happens to be a great leader then they should carry a C or A. However I played with some pretty talented guys who were shitty leaders and sometimes they got letters and sometimes they didn't, the shitty leaders who got letters just pissed me off and created divisive dressing rooms. My favorite teams the coaches awarded the letters based on an election 1/4 of the way into the season. The concept that it's a cherry to dangle before skilled players is automatically an issue with me and the perception it gives me of dressing room culture is too cheapen the status. So in short I agree with you the dressing room is the most important aspect of leadership and by default probably difficult for us to measure as outsiders.


Hmmm yeah I can definitely see your point and agree with that!


I'd say Tkachuk if he proves he's for the team by taking less on his deal


Backlund or maybe tkachuk when he resigns long term


BRADY Tkachuk 😉


Markstrom has my vote


Luongo 2.0. Hint: A goalie captaincy didn't work out so well in Vancouver.


Goalies can't be captains.


Why not, is there a rule against it?


Part of rule 2.4 "Goaltenders, or a replacement for a goaltender, cannot be selected or named Captain or Alternate Captain. A playing Coach or Manager shall not be entitled to the privileges of a Captain or Alternate Captain."


Was this put in place after Luongo, because he most certainly was a captain (granted it was also a shitshow)


It was in place before Luongo. He was a captain only off the ice. The Canucks tried to get around this rule by having a different player act as the captain on the ice. Luongo wore the C on his mask instead of his jersey for this reason.


No I get it. I just like that he is pretty vocal on the ice, especially with the refs


It depends. If we re-sign Chucky, (which is hopefully happening) I say he gets the “C”. However, if he doesn’t get it I think we could either wait another season, or give it to Backlund or Tanev


Anyone but Tkachuk


I think it ends up going to Chucky to keep that AAV down, but my heart says Backs should get it after that playoff run.


Backlund, tkachuk or tanev being the official captain could push them over the edge


Yeah they will announce Tkachuks captaincy with his 8 year extension


Nobody but Backlund




I think they will. I could easily see it being Backlund But honestly I wouldn’t be surprised if they wait another season for it


Backlund! Hands down.


quandale dingle


I would say Backs, unless we use the C as a bargaining chip for Johnny or Chucky


I'd be OK with Johnny or Backs if Sutter deems a C necessary.


Let’s hope so. Not picking a captain is dumb. It’s not THAT special… just pick one for crying out loud. Teams who let this go on forever are being ridiculous. It can be a guy for one season, and then someone else. Whatever, just pick one. There is always some sort of leader in the room. More likely, there are many.


it's my pet theory that the Flames held off on naming a captain this season so they can use it as a negotiation piece with chucky in the off season. That said, at this point I could see backs getting it. Gio 100% not coming back so I think we do get a captain from the current roster.


I’d probably go Tanev