Vanek started wearing an “A” on his chest about a month ago by my estimation. Publicly, it was very well received. I supported the decision too. I think it’s an appropriate progression for Vanek as a professional with the Sabres. His actions after last night’s game showed me he’s making a sincere effort to justify the recognition.

There is a concern however.

Something that’s always discussed when Vanek’s name comes up is how noticeably frustrated he becomes at times. I’ve never seen a scorer react to a missed opportunity as intensely and as expressively as Vanek does. He does not manage failure well. When he gets cold, it’s only natural to wonder just what’s going on in his head. Is this an appealing quality to have in a leader? It’s also important to ask: is this player stable enough to handle this added responsibility.

Vanek’s frustration is a part of who he is as a hockey player. Just this month when Vanek failed to finish an opportunity I saw him throw his head up in the air and glide right into the end boards while the puck was still live. He had momentarily disconnected from the play in a pronounced way. With that said, it’s tough to point to his frustration as a very troublesome sign when his effort and production is consistently on point.

Thomas Vanek has 27 goals, 39 assists, and 66 points so far in 76 games this season. Overall it has been a largely successful season for Vanek. Impressive even, considering Derek Roy and Drew Stafford have missed major time and important players like Jason Pominville and Tim Connolly have had relatively poor statistical seasons. Vanek is leading the team in points and is ahead of the next highest point scorer (Ennis) by 19.

He has always been the designated leader of this offense. Something is different about Vanek this year though. Suddenly he’s in the leadership discussion. That’s new. What explains his emergence as the favorite amongst fans to become the next captain? Maybe we thought we had Vanek pretty well figured out but we’ve actually been wrong for awhile.

We always just assume Vanek’s focus and frustration has been entirely on his attempt to help the team by scoring. What if, after he became established and signed his big boy contract, he has always wanted his role to be that of a more complete star as opposed to the one dimensional talent he has been most of his career? Maybe he always wanted to be an acknowledged leader and not being recognized as a one always felt a little empty to him.

Do you think he wants to be thought of exclusively as the offensively talented winger? I think perhaps adding the responsibility of a formal leadership position has taken some of the pressure off Vanek to score because he has other opportunities to help the team. Vanek will probably never agree that expanding his role so as to dilute the pressure was ever a real interest of his but I think the idea of being a more influential and complete player has been a priority for him since he signed the extension.

* * *

I want to change directions and talk for a moment about Jason Pominville to help make a point on Vanek’s perception.

Pominville has played in 454 regular season games. Vanek has played in 465. Pominville has scored 143 goals in his career. Vanek’s next goal will be his 200^th. When watching both of those players there’s no doubt in my mind that Vanek is a superior scorer. I don’t just mean goals. I mean scorer — someone that contributes to pucks going in the opponents net whether it be directly by means of a shot or indirectly through a pass. Vanek is just a much more dangerous offensive player than Pominville.

Think about how a player like Pominville is discussed in relation to Vanek right now. Pominville just sort of exists as a disappointment. His career has actually followed a near identical trajectory as Vanek’s, displaced by one year.

That’s kind of eerie to look at isn’t it?

Both Pominville and Vanek had their worst statistical seasons in their rookie years. Excluding those seasons, Pominville is having his worst season yet and Vanek had his worst season last year. But when the playoffs started last season, everyone was looking to Thomas Vanek. There are expectations on Vanek. He is always a part of the Sabres discussion. Pominville is often quickly dismissed.

Why is that?

I think salaries are a big part of it. Vanek makes close to two million dollars more than Pominville. Vanek is the highest paid player on the team. People associate a player of that status with high production. Pominville is in the shadow of Vanek in that respect and I think it takes a lot of the heat off him.

The other reason, something my friends and I talk about a lot, is that Pominville just doesn’t excite people. Pominville might be the slowest skater on the team. He has a very slow motor and shuts down whenever a defender is close by. When that happens, Pominville stops moving his feet and just going into balance mode. Think of how many times you’ve seen a defender called for hooking or tripping Pominville when he has the puck.

Vanek is very different. He’s a very exciting player. He’s become much better transitioning with the puck and of course he’s a very creative player down low in the offensive zone.

Vanek is someone that generates excitement through his involvement in so many scoring chances. A consequence of this is that by having so many quality scoring chances, his failures create a much greater sense of disappointment in comparison to a player like Pominville. Vanek’s misses collect. There are people who insist upon placing a lot of the blame for a loss on Vanek after games in which he fails to finish great scoring opportunities. I think that’s unfair to Vanek. In most instances, Vanek was a major part in creating these chances. Yet Vanek gets criticized, meanwhile lesser, floundering players are spared. Does that make sense? Vanek is at least doing something positive.

I don’t think making Vanek captain will cause fans and observers to reconsider preconceived notions. It will probably only result in Vanek being placed on a higher pedestal. Blah blah blah team captain, Thomas Vanek. I’m hoping that as a recognized leader, Vanek will find greater satisfaction as a hugely important member of the Sabres.

* * *

As I look around at this collection of forwards, I see a bunch of young guys with a lot of flash and some finish, I see a handful of unreliable and streaky veterans, and I see Vanek. Vanek is the glue. He is what makes it all work. I imagine him more than any other player as being the one to score big playoff goals. I can literally see it in my mind now.

Vanek is a guy I feel like the Sabres can win with. He’s going to cause problems for whoever he plays against. He’s going to create chances. Maybe he won’t finish but at the very least he’ll give the Sabres some momentum by creating scoring chances. As each game passes it becomes more and more clear I want him to be the player that’s leading the Sabres. Part of the reason for this is it’s effect on the other players but I’m at the point now where I think leadership will do good by Vanek most of all. And that is new.

I don’t pretend like I know a polished receipt for winning in the National Hockey League. I could probably list about a dozen things that winning teams do well and then say something vague and ridiculous like hockey teams need to be able to do at least eight of these things and then they’ll probably be in position to achieve some degree of success. That wouldn’t be interesting though because I’m not a professional and I’m ignorant to more facets of hockey than I’d ever like to admit.

For now, I want to just talk about the players. I think early in their careers they probably consider winning the same way that young filmmakers and musicians care about the acclaim that comes from winning awards like the Oscars and Grammys. Hockey players may very well want to win the Stanley Cup when they’re young but it seems to me like winning is accessory to stabilizing and legitimizing their place in this industry. Young players measure personal success based on the accomplishment of individual goals and hopefully, by extension, it contributes to the success of their team. That’s totally understandable from my perspective. It’s clearly different for veterans though. For older veterans, they define personal success as being a contributor on a winning team. That’s why they tend to be the best leaders. The desire to collect championships is usually greatest in these players and they’re more likely to run through a wall in order to do so. I’m going to start calling this desire The Fire because it’s contagious in that it spreads, well, like fire and portrays an image that’s often associated with passion. A player with The Fire is someone that’s supremely motivated to perform at an extraordinarily high level while pushing or pulling or dragging, but hopefully inspiring, his team to victory.

Besides age, there are other triggers a player has that can cause him to catch The Fire and drive his team to win. I see The Fire most often in players trying to repair a damaged reputation or players with tremendous and exceptional reputations. I can’t think of any instance when it’s both. The difference is that in the former, the individual player with The Fire is extremely personally motivated and the team is motivated by association. The opposite is true with the latter when a team becomes extremely motivated simply by being around such a powerful presence. The individual simply has to continue to perpetuate his reputation. An aging veteran may have The Fire for reasons other than the previous two I mentioned but often their diminished skills prevents them from being a serious difference maker. So while they have value, it’s not the same as the examples I’m about to reference.

If you look at a guy like Chris Drury it’s pretty obvious he’s not even in the same solar system in terms of talent level as the superstars in this league but his reputation is nearly as illustrious. Drury has won championships at so many different levels that winning has become part of his identity as a hockey player. There are reasons for that: his personality, work ethic, style of play, among other things. Combined with a bit of fortune, he’s tagged as a natural leader – a winner. His reputation, not his scoring production, is what affects his teammates most. Of course Drury still works hard and everything else one would expect of him but from the management, coaches, and fans perspective, they should be hoping The Fire ignites his teammates to live up to the standard of a Drury lead team that’s followed him his entire career.

There are plenty of examples where the reputation of a single player elevates his team to extraordinary levels, beyond what their talent suggests the team should be achieving. Think of what Chris Pronger did for the ’06 Oilers and the ’07 Ducks. Think of what Martin Brodeur is doing for this year’s Devils and what Ryan Smyth is doing for this year’s Kings. I mention Drury though because although he’s not at all washed up, he isn’t really a super star either. He’s just a guy that contributes who teammates really respect and admire.

On the other hand, a poor reputation that’s been built on a foundation of unfulfilled expectations can sometimes but not always evoke a strong response from the right player. The desire for redemption is the source for motivation. There are players sprinkled all over the league trying to redeem themselves from a personal indiscretion or injury or production slump or a history of failing in important situations or whatever. Redemption is a powerful motivational tool especially when mixed with talent. Accomplishing individual goals may be fulfilling and satisfying but it doesn’t attract nearly the same attention as winning does.

For Sidney Crosby last year and Alex Ovechkin this year, two players that have accomplished almost all the personal goals expected of them except for winning a professional championship, The Fire comes from redemption. It case its slipped your mind, Crosby lost in the last game of the ’08 finals to the Red Wings and Ovechkin lost to the rivaled Penguins in the second round of the ’09 playoffs. Losing is different for them because they are such exceptional talents. Despite all the great things Crosby and Ovechkin do for their teams, people will always look to them in defeat. It’s their team, win or lose. In the years that followed those agonizing eliminations, each put up huge statistical seasons and pushed their teams to an insane amount of wins though how many games the Capitals will win is still of course unknown. Crosby is playing great this year but he doesn’t have The Fire like he did last year and it shows in how some of his teammates have been playing. There’s not as much on the line for Crosby to prove like there was last year. Ovechkin might have The Fire last year but having to experience professional disappointment of that magnitude looks to have really motivated him even further this year and, more importantly, it further motivated his team.

Tim Thomas was another classic case of redemption last year. He willed his team to victory. The Bruins rallied around him. But look how much things have changed for Thomas in less than 12 months. Thomas is now an established goaltender and so the pressure to prove his doubters wrong is no longer as strong.

Meanwhile does it really seem like Mike Richards has The Fire this year? He’s a fine player but he’s just one of many on the Flyers with similar reputations and little on the line personally. The careers of Richards, Carter, and Hartnell are not measured with the same standard of players like Crosby and Ovechkin. Richards will need to taste agonizing defeat in a situation where his shortcomings were the result of the team’s failure and it will need to come at a time in his career where the thought of winning championships wakes him up at 3AM in cold sweats. It has to torment him. If those feelings don’t shadow him, talented opponents for whom it does are going to pass the Flyers by.

It’s not that Thomas or Richards have become lazy; it’s just that The Fire seems to be burning more intensely in players like Ovechkin and Heatley than in Richards and Thomas. They, Richards and Thomas, are established players in this league now with few doubters and neither have the reputation of a world beater capable of continually inspiring greatness in his teammates. When it comes to having success in hockey there needs to be a source for the motivation – a source for The Fire.

* * *

Michael Peca, after finishing a one-year contract with the Toronto Maple Leafs, expressed his interest in coming back to Buffalo in the summer of 2007. This was the same summer that the Sabres lost their two co-captains, Chris Drury and Daniel Briere. Naturally, there were leadership questions heading into the 2007-2008 season. From what I understand, the biggest concern was whether or not Peca’s influence in the locker room would be positive or negative. He had a reputation as a "my way or the highway" type of leader. At the time, management had faith that leaders would emerge internally. Honestly, so did I. Obviously that didn’t happen as the Sabres clearly lacked leadership and direction in the two seasons that followed. So was it a mistake when the Sabres passed on Michael Peca?

It’s tough to say, a lot of factors have to be considered. Here are the numbers: In the two seasons that followed his signing, Peca averaged 68 games played, 6 goals, 22 assists, and 16:20 in ice time per game. That’s decent production considering Columbus paid for him close to 1-million dollars each year. He proved to be quite durable as well. But as is so often the problem with players like Peca, it’s tough to judge his value based on those numbers alone. He’s a defensive forward.

As far as the team record is concerned, in the two years prior to Peca’s arrival, the Blue Jackets finished at an average of 12th place in the Western Conference. In the two years Peca has been in Columbus, the Blue Jackets finished an average of 10th place. Not much difference, but an improvement. Remember, Columbus has been a mess the past 10 years.

The stat that really jumped out at me however was how much better Columbus performed defensively when Peca was on the roster. In the two years prior to Peca’s arrival, and keep in mind one of those years was before the lockout when goals were less frequent, the average number of goals given up each season by Columbus was 264 and the teams goal differential was -52. In the two years after Peca’s arrival, Columbus averaged 224 goals given up per season with a -15 goal differential. Clearly, the Blue Jackets were much better defensively when Peca was on the roster.

Now, the Blue Jackets improvement can’t be totally attributed to the arrival of Michael Peca. Prior to the 2008-2009 season, Columbus acquired defenseman Fedor Tyutin, Christian Backman, and Mike Commodore. In addition Ken Hitchcock was hired as the new coach near the start of the 2006-2007 season. And clearly, the emergence of goaltenders Pascal Leclaire and Steve Mason had a lot to do in the reduction of goals scored.

But consider this, out of all the players on the 2008-2009 Columbus roster, only two players were above the age of 30: Fredrick Modin and Michael Peca. Is it safe to say those guys were leaders on this team? Columbus thought so; Peca was an assistant captain. He may not have been the most productive player on the score sheet, even though he was 3rd on the team in scoring in 2007-208 season, but Peca certainly had value as a leader for this team. They went to the playoffs last spring too.

Whether or not Peca would have had the same influence for the Sabres is debatable. Chemistry is a funny thing. But honestly, could Peca’s presence on the Sabres possibly have resulted in a worse record than the Sabres amassed in the last two years? I doubt it. Again, I agreed with Sabres management when they decided to pass on Peca at the time. But I don’t get paid to make those decisions. In any event, it’s a discussion I feel is worth having.