Tuesdays With Hildy: Do Teams Need A Superstar?
by hildymac on Jul 20, 2010 11:00 AM CDT
Email
PrintWith the conclusion of the Ilya Kovalchuk drama finally upon us (praise be to God), the fanbases of the teams who missed out on him are having one of two reactions - laughter at the absurd rumored terms of the contract, or wailing and gnashing of teeth at the lack of a superstar forward for their club. "No!" their fans cry. "Now we'll never win that Cup!" One the other side of the coin, some Devils fans are already planning the parade route. Obviously, both sides are an overreaction to just one player, and we all know that one guy doesn't make a team. Usually, one guy just hogs the attention away from everyone else on the team, even those who deserve the applause in their own right. There's relief from some Kings fans that the farm wasn't sold for a player at the expense of a breakthrough youth movement. Patience, they believe is a virtue, and the Kings are on the verge of breaking through. Taking a cue from the more level-headed Kings fans, I ask you - does a team HAVE to have a superstar to win?
Here's a list of the last 10 teams to win the Stanley Cup:
- 2010 - Chicago Blackhawks
- 2009 - Pittsburgh Penguins
- 2008 - Detroit Red Wings
- 2007 - Anaheim Ducks
- 2006 - Carolina Hurricanes
- 2005 - Stupid lockout
- 2004 - Tampa Bay Lightning
- 2003 - New Jersey Devils
- 2002 - Detroit Red Wings
- 2001 - Colorado Avalanche
- 2000 - New Jersey Devils
- 1999 - Dallas Stars
Here's a list of the top 25 paid players in the NHL. How many correlations do you see? How many have been on teams that have won the Cup? On that list there are nine players (unless I'm dumb and missed one, which is a possibility) who have won the Cup, several doing so the same year (Crosby & Malkin; Hossa, Keith, and Campbell). Five of the nine players are on two teams, and one player (Zetterberg) was on two Cup winning teams. Wikipedia has a cool addition to their chart of Cup winners - they list who scored the game tying goal. Let's see... superstars... we have two former Blues (of course), Hull and Shanny. Zetterberg... and this past season Kane. Who scored the big goal for the Penguins? Talbot. Who landed that huge one for the Ducks? Travis Moen. That's not to say that the big boys didn't contribute, because they did, but if you look at the full list there aren't a ton of big names that jump out - this proves that hockey is a team sport, not won by one player alone.
You can take a superstar and surround him with middling talent (Kovalchuk in Atlanta, Nash in Columbus, Iginla in Calgary) and you are not going to win. You're not. You can take a fairly good team lacking in big names, coach them well, and have great team chemistry, and you have a good shot at the big prize. Every one of those Cup winning teams that I listed might've had a superstar, but that's not why they won. Look at the list of coaches.
There will be much wailing and gnashing of teeth in LaLa land tonight, but Kings fans should know not to overvalue a great player. Gretzky only took the Kings to the SCF once. Yes, he won in Edmonton four times, but those whole teams were amazing.
But this is just my opinion - do you guys think a superstar is necessary for a team? Or, do you think it's necessary from an off-the-ice standpoint? You gotta market someone.
19 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
to clarify
You gotta market someone.
On the Forecheck: preaching the Predators' gospel to the unwashed masses.
by Chris Burton on Jul 20, 2010 11:13 AM CDT up reply actions
As long as you have NHL-caliber players wearing your logo...
… you have someone to market.
by BleedBlue42 on Jul 20, 2010 12:29 PM CDT up reply actions
Exactly, and with tough, hard working American boys like Backes and Oshie I think the Blues are fine in that area.
On the Forecheck: preaching the Predators' gospel to the unwashed masses.
by Chris Burton on Jul 20, 2010 2:08 PM CDT up reply actions
Define a "superstar"
What do you call a superstar? A 50-60 goal scorer or a player with 100+ points? Looking at that list I could make the argument that most of those teams had a legit superstar on them:
1999 – Dallas – Hullie
2000,2003 – New Jersey – Martin Brodeur
2001 – Colorado – Joe Sakic, Ray Bourque, Patrick Roy
2002,2008 – Detroit – Fucking Steve Yzerman
2004 – Tampa Bay – Martin St. Louis
2009 – Pittsburgh – Sidney Crosby
Carolina, Anaheim and maybe Chicago are the exceptions to the rule, unless you want to add Kane or 20 Cent to that list…then it’s only 2 teams.
Baltimore Blast - 6-time MISL/NISL Champions
Let's go Blues!
How many of those guys, on those teams...
… were “me-first” guys?
Hull was bigger than the Blues, but after going to Dallas and getting benched a couple times, he figured out how to sublimate his ego to the goals of the team. Most of the rest of those guys cared more about team success than individual stats.
Kovalchuk has been pretty good at piling up gaudy numbers on bad teams. Will he accept change for the sake of the team? Will he learn how to back-check, even if it means fewer cherry-picking opportunities? Would he consider 30-35-65 a successful season if it meant getting to spend a day with a big silver trophy?
After some thought, I chose #3
The scoring has to come from somewhere. Even with awesome defense (now with True No.1 Goaltender™ !!! ) we will still give up on average 2 goals a night. The best team in the league last year averaged 2.27 (thanks, www.nhl.com!!!) That means 3 out of every 5 games we’ll need to score at least 3. (a .610 winning percentage is needed to reach 100 points, assuming we don’t want to squeak into the 8th spot on the last weekend of the season). For sake of argument, lets call it 230 goals. How do we want to spread them out?
Superstar:
Defense – 10% (23)
4th line – 5% (12)
3rd line – 20% (46)
2nd line – 25% (57)
1st line – 40% (92)
3 scoring lines
Defense – 10% (23)
4th line – 5% (12)
3rd line – 25% (57)
2nd line – 30% (69)
1st line – 30% (69)
If we go the non-superstar route (I’m not taking sides here, I don’t have a strong opinion either way), and we can produce six 20-goal scorers, we can get there.
I’m just playing with numbers here, but my point is, we need scoring no matter where it comes from. Where do our readers propose we get it?
The race is not always to the swift, nor the battle to the strong. But that's the way to bet. - Damon Runyon
I assume we can say MOST of the team under produced last season
With Brad Boyes being at the TOP of that list . . . so even w/ his 14 goals, he should be a 20+ scorer.
Andy Mac had 24
Steen had 24
Perron had 20
TJ had 18
Backes had 17
based on those numbers (and the fact that everyone on that list but Steen under performed last season) it is quite possible that STL has 6 20+ goal scorers . . . and many would argue that if Berg doesn’t get there as well, he will be replaced come next season’s free agency.
I think the bigger questions come with the players we have lost. . . Walt last season spent 50% of his time in front of the net. . . the three obvious choices to fill that role (based on size alone) are Backes, Berg and Win . . . and though each of them have had moments in the past couple of years where they have shown promise there. . . none of them have truly embraced it like Walt did 9though it could be because they all like to eat solid food)
None of the above.
I would vote for the first option — but if we don’t have one, I will still go to games.
I don’t think you need a Kovy/Sid/Ovie superstar, but you do need a guy who will get mentioned in out of town press and national highlight reels every once in a while.
Let's go Blues!!!
by Milo. on Jul 20, 2010 12:29 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
I think the Habs were a good example of this.
You don’t have guys putting up obscene numbers of goals or that during the season, and PK Suban( I think) was a hero and he was an AHL call up! Sure having a superstar is nice, but as has been said before. A team of good hard working players is much better. Especially when you have to gut your roster to get hold of one.
Barret Jackman is my hero.
Fueled. These new shores burn. Shadow, my sweet shadow, to you I look no more.
Yeah, the Habs are a great example
They’ve sure won a lot of Cups since they lost their last superstar in Patrick Roy!
Every team who actually has won the Cup has a guy or two putting up a PPG on their top line.
Elite talent is much more important in the playoffs because you can put them on the ice more often and in more key situations compared to the longer grind of the regular season. The defenses get better and better and you need better players to score consistently against that and to take pressure off of your depth players.
It remains to be seen if the Blues have those kind of guys right now. They are banking on some of the kids becoming PPG type of guys if they are handed more ice time and becoming the kind of guys who can really lead a team. I wouldn’t be too surprised if Berglund or Perron were scoring a PPG next season or the year after, but if they don’t develop on that path the Blues are not going to be a real Cup threat without adding some elite talent somewhere along the rode.
I think the poll is misleading
I do think that having a superstar is an important part of being an elite time, but by adding “i’m never going to watch the team again unless they sign one,” you make me not want to vote for that.
by JohnMatuszakloveschunk on Jul 20, 2010 6:59 PM CDT reply actions
Shape up, Hildy!
I agree, the incorrect grammar and use of “one” instead of exclamation points is deplorable.
This is Game Time, not some silly WordPress operation
No beer and no TV make Homer...something something.
by Poor College Student on Jul 20, 2010 9:24 PM CDT up reply actions
Remember when Dutchie was the Blues' "superstar"?
Yeah, those were trying times.
That being said, I chose #3. But we can reclaim the glory of the Dutchie if we just offer him something tangible.
Besides, isn’t Halak the Blues’ superstar designate for the moment, despite Backes running roughshod all over Canada’s finest? We have one, it’s just not a forward.
St. Louis Game Time . . . I need another beer.
And I can also write things in 140 characters or fewer.
I wonder
how many here (SLGT) these days even know about the Dutchie reference.
PC Load Letter? What the fuck does that mean?
The times they are a changin’
No beer and no TV make Homer...something something.
by Poor College Student on Jul 21, 2010 3:36 PM CDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recent FanShots
In Association With
Latest Puck Daddy - NHL from Yahoo! Sports
- 2013 Winter Classic plan revealed; college, OHL games included
- Puck Daddy Hockey Rumors Live Chat!
- Rangers, Devils remind us why NHL coaches’ challenges are a necessity
- Max Pacioretty’s bond with formerly comatose teen changes outlook on life
- Goofy KHL goal celebration alert: Andrey Stepanov scores, slides and poses (Video)
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.
