Haydain Neale, 1970–2009
The Lee's Palace Mural is Dead! Long Live the Lee's Palace Mural!
Peeve Patrol
Third Floor, First Rate
The Daily Photoist: November 24, 2009
The Maple Leafs begin the unofficial second half of the NHL season tonight in Minnesota. But the week's big event occurs Saturday, when the team honours former captain Doug Gilmour before their game against the Pittsburgh Penguins.
A banner bearing Gilmour’s likeness will be hoisted to the Air Canada Centre rafters—yet while it’ll bear his iconic #93, Gilmour’s number is not being retired. The Maple Leafs seldom "retire" a number; rather, they honour the player while keeping his number in circulation. The Leafs will retire a number if, and only if, a player who wore it suffers a career-ending injury during his time with the team. So far, only two players have met the criteria. One was Ace Bailey (#6), who suffered a career-ending head injury back in 1933. The other was Bill Barilko (#5), who famously scored the 1951 Stanley Cup–winning goal before being immortalized by the Tragically Hip in "Fifty Mission Cap." You'll notice their banners are silver instead of the usual white.
Otherwise, there's virtually nothing stopping a current player from adopting an iconic number of yore. Some people don't like this policy: Dave Keon, for instance, has a long-standing feud with the Leafs organization that stems from their refusal to retire his old #14. We're quick to disagree with much of what happens down at the Air Canada Centre—yet when it comes to this particular issue we’re firmly in the Leafs’ corner because of how it ties generations together. When we see Matt Stajan wearing the #14, for example, he's offering continuing testament to Keon's place in team history (not to mention all the other former #14s as well). We see the appeal in retiring a player's number: there’s something undeniably poignant about a number being so indelibly linked to one individual that no one else could possibly wear it. Keeping the number in circulation, however, keeps the player’s legacy alive where it matters most: on the ice.
Gilmour’s #93 won’t be worn again for years—but we like that the option’s there. And as much as we’ll enjoy watching Gilmour’s banner raised to the rafters, we can think of one better way of honouring the man they called “Killer”: giving it to a player who wears the #93 with the same sort of passion as he did. That would be the most fitting tribute of all.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
Dude, are you really going to compare Stajan to Keon? Or even suggest that Stajan is somehow carrying on Keon's legacy?
This is why I firmly believe numbers should be retired. Especially in Toronto. Next to Montreal, we have one of the most heralded hockey teams in the world. Its players - at the very least - should be deserving of being immortalized.
But what's done is done. So maybe, there needs to be a process. Like if you are a goalie and want number 1, you need to actually earn that number by lets say...i dunno...winning 3 consecutive Cups.
Of course not, chenyip; however, I am suggesting that somewhere along the line, someone might come along who can carry Keon's legacy. I'm a big fan of a specific number being associated with multiple generations of players instead of just one. Take Manchester United, for instance: the team's #7 shirt has been worn by, among others, George Best, Eric Cantona, David Beckham and Cristiano Ronaldo. As a result, it's impossible to watch Ronaldo and not recall those other famous #7s. I'm certainly not equating Matt Stajan and Cristiano Ronaldo (or even the Maple Leafs and Manchester United, for that matter), but I think that particular notion carries over quite nicely.
I seem to recall Doug Gilmour retiring as a Leaf after being injured in his first game back playing with us. Doesn't that make him eligible?
Players are already immortalized - by their names. Maybe when we're robots identified only by our barcodes should our unique numbers be retired, but for now I prefer to cheer on and remember the great players by who they are and not what they wear on their backs.