rick@ucla-cs.UUCP (03/23/85)
In article <1466@dciem.UUCP> jeff@dciem.UUCP (Jeff Richardson) writes: >The other teams in the league can learn two valuable lessons from the 1985 >Flyers on how to build a contender: > >1. It is much more important to have experience on defence than on forward. > (This is a lesson that our Maple Leafs should have learned by now.) > >2. Great teams are built in the second round of the draft and later, not > in the first round. That's where players like the Flyers' young forwards > are found, but since they have some quality that's difficult to detect > at junior age (it certainly doesn't show up on paper), it takes a great > scouting staff to separate these players from the bulk of players from > these rounds who will never make the NHL. I can't really argue with the first point. However, it is dangerous to make generalizations. I think most teams (except, of course, for the Oilers) will agree that you must build from defense. Let's take a case history of the New York Islanders: In their first year the Isles set a new standard for inept play. The players began to wonder where the town "Hapless" was because they were often referred to (when they visited other towns) as the Hapless Islanders. To be frank, they stunk. Even I didn't like them then. However, in their second year they hired Arbor as coach. He stressed defensive play (and brought along a couple of young goalies: Billy Smith and Glen Resch). And there was *the* draft. Sam Pollock walked G.M. Torrey around the Montreal Forum 3 times trying to pry the Isles #1 draft choice (Denis Potvin) away. The Isles also drafted Dave Lewis in the second round. With the new defensive posture the team improved. Their record wasn't much better but they weren't getting blown out as much. By adding defensive forwards they made the playoffs in their third year, the year they drafted Clark Gillies in the first round and Bryan Trottier (who no one seemed to like at the time) in the second (Trottier stayed in junior that year - it was the first year of the under-age draft). With his defenive team in place (forwards and defensemen) Arbor then turned his attention to offense. Players like Bob Bourne and Bob Nystrom were playing already but then were given more room. Trottier came along. And then there was Mike Bossy ("he can't check his hat"). Arbor claimed he could teach a man to backcheck but not to score like that guy - and so Bossy ended up on Long Island. With a little more tinkering on offense (and defense) they got 4 Stanley Cups. The plan was clear from the start: build from the net, to defense, to offense. And it worked. Now, for the second point: "Great teams are built in the second round of the draft and later". I disagree. Great teams are built from good players who play for the team and not for themselves. The reason so many first rounders flop is that teams cannot judge talent AND character AND "chemistry". A great junior player doesn't always pan out. A further problem has been the underage draft. It is a real crap-shoot figuring out how an 18 year old will play in a couple of years. So, now you end up with first rounders being discouraged because they are left in junior for another year or two so they quit trying. The later round picks know they have to try harder so they put in more effort and end up "better" (not necessarily more talented). The current system (underage draft) hurts the weaker teams because a high draft choice is a real gamble, while the stronger teams can afford to let players continue to mature in junior without force-feeding them in big leagues. Of course it helps if you are friends with Nelson Skalbania so he will hand you Gretzky on a platter :-). -- Rick Gillespie rick@ucla-cs ...!{cepu|ihnp4|sdcrdcf|ucbvax}!ucla-cs!rick "She turned me into a newt! . . . I got better."
jeff@dciem.UUCP (Jeff Richardson) (03/25/85)
> Now, for the second point: "Great teams are built in the second round of > the draft and later". I disagree. Great teams are built from good > players who play for the team and not for themselves. The reason so > many first rounders flop is that teams cannot judge talent AND character > AND "chemistry". A great junior player doesn't always pan out. A > further problem has been the underage draft. It is a real crap-shoot > figuring out how an 18 year old will play in a couple of years. So, > now you end up with first rounders being discouraged because they are > left in junior for another year or two so they quit trying. The later > round picks know they have to try harder so they put in more effort > and end up "better" (not necessarily more talented). To me this sounds like an argument in favour of my claim that great teams are built in the second round and later. The good players that play for the team and not themselves, those with character and chemistry, are usually found in the second round or later, since the first-rounders are usually the standout individuals. Teams pretty well have to pick a standout individual, usually a big scorer, in the first round because it's much easier to predict which juniors will be good scorers so it's safer to pick one of them (There's great pressure on the team's manager not to blow their first-round pick.), but as the article above says, because of the pressure and the underage draft, a lot of them flop, so that makes the later rounds even more important. Sure you need players like Bossy and Potvin, but you still won't have a championship team without the good team players you get in the later rounds, and all championship teams seem to have at least one star that was picked in a later round too (examples: Trottier, Larry Robinson, Jari Kurri). > The current system > (underage draft) hurts the weaker teams because a high draft choice is > a real gamble, while the stronger teams can afford to let players > continue to mature in junior without force-feeding them in big leagues. I couldn't agree more. It hurts hockey in general too because so many young prospects are being ruined, especially the defensemen. I guess the best way to build a contender is to start off with a contender. Have you ever noticed how, with only a few exceptions, the good teams in the NHL tend to stay good while the weaker teams stay weak? Of course the draft isn't the only reason for that, but that's another story. -- Jeff Richardson, DCIEM, Toronto (416) 635-2073 {linus,ihnp4,uw-beaver,floyd}!utcsrgv!dciem!jeff {allegra,ihnp4,linus,decvax}!utzoo!dciem!jeff
haapanen@watdcsu.UUCP (Tom Haapanen [DCS]) (03/26/85)
In article <4468@ucla-cs.ARPA> rick@ucla-cs.UUCP (Rick Gillespie) writes: >In article <1466@dciem.UUCP> jeff@dciem.UUCP (Jeff Richardson) writes: >>2. Great teams are built in the second round of the draft and later, not >> in the first round. That's where players like the Flyers' young forwards >> are found, but since they have some quality that's difficult to detect >> at junior age (it certainly doesn't show up on paper), it takes a great >> scouting staff to separate these players from the bulk of players from >> these rounds who will never make the NHL. I agree with Jeff here. You can't build a team on first-round choices; you only get one each year and you can't expect them to play for another 19 years... >In their first year the Isles set a new standard for inept play. The >players began to wonder where the town "Hapless" was because they were >often referred to (when they visited other towns) as the Hapless Islanders. >To be frank, they stunk. Even I didn't like them then. A true fan will stick with his team through thick and thin. I've seen some pretty bad years in Montreal (although good ones have been in the majority) but I've never considered switching loyalties. >The current system >(underage draft) hurts the weaker teams because a high draft choice is >a real gamble, while the stronger teams can afford to let players >continue to mature in junior without force-feeding them in big leagues. This is quite true. Look at what the Maple Laughs have had to do --- bring up from the juniors every single player who can stand up on his skates without giving them time to hone their skills. >Of course it helps if you are friends with Nelson Skalbania so he will >hand you Gretzky on a platter :-). It would help even more to be friends with Peter "Puck" Pocklington! \tom haapanen watmath!watdcsu!haapanen Don't cry, don't do anything No lies, back in the government No tears, party time is here again President Gas is up for president (c) Psychedelic Furs, 1982