Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

ABNuck

Why "star" laidened teams rarely win the Stanley Cup

38 posts in this topic

"Star" or not, all that really matters at the end of the day is how the play happens on the ice. Of course, the odds to succeed SHOULD improve when the team has the big name chips, but if the team (and I use that to mean a cohesive group) doesn't gel, nor does it fire on all cylinders then that's when expectations fall short.

Think about it-- 2010 Russian Olympic men's hockey team (I believe it was 2010, correct me if I'm wrong), the team had all the marquee pieces on its roster: Datsyuk, Malkin, Ovechkin, Kovalchuk, Semin, Gonchar, Radulov... yet because that team didn't pass but tried to do everything individually that's when the team falls apart and fails. Conversely, look at the Spanish men's soccer team: tiki taka (the Spanish soccer tactic) involves skilled players working in groups to make plays with high levels of cohesion and high pass success rates that allow them to quickly penetrate the opposition's defense. Success comes as a group, and failure comes when they fail to come together as a group.

P.S. salaries do not define the "star" status (remember Scott Gomez and Wade Redden?), so as mentioned above the star argument should be made based upon the player's own ability to elevate play when it matters most (since we're talking playoffs here). e.g. Ruslan Fedotenko all those years back in 03-04 season, when his scoring stepped up and brought the team success. Fernando Pisani in the Oilers' run, they were stars, for the time that they were contributing, even though they didn't earn the big bucks; this year, guys like Trevor Lewis and Bryce Salvador come to mind.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is only a recent trend. Even look at the New Jersey Devils, particularly their defence - not one star on the blueline, and only Kovalchuk and Parise up front who are bonified NHL stars (all do respect to Elias but he's past his prime).

The reason for their success is solid team coaching and everyone playing well, from 1st liner to 3rd pair defenceman. Everyone bands together much tighter without a true star to carry them, as did the Devils' defence last playoffs against some high-powered offences.

As for the LA Kings, I would say they're ripe with stars who were just underperforming until the playoffs. In my mind, Kopitar, Doughty and Quick are NHL stars, while guys like Carter, Richards, Brown and Mitchell are more of the subtle hard-working stars similar to the Bruins team who won the Cup.

All you need is the perfect mix of hard-workers to skilled superstars nowadays, and I feel the Canucks have that with our top-6 mostly powerforwards apart from the only 2 superstars in the Sedins. Minnesota still lacks these hard working powerforwards and has too much skill right now.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

would this thread exist if the Nucks magically landed both players? no

Obviously landing two major star players doesn't mean you have a walking path to the cup. You still need for those players to work as a team AND you'll still need some "puck luck" along the way (every team benefits from that.. or at least benefits from not having "bad" puck luck.)

Not to derail the thread, but many of you fail to understand the significance of those two signings.

- Parisie will make those around him better because those other players should have more room to do things

- Suter should also make those around him better, and with a defensive core that is still very young, this will help confidence

- it proves that Pitt and Detroit don't have the market cornered on players that "want to win the cup." Actually this offseason is probably going to signal the end to Detroit being one of the top teams (unless they suddenly find some diamonds late in the draft.)

- These two players agree that our prospect crop is going to make us a contender in the next 5 years (but that's also going along with the thinking that they wanted to "just win")

- This current ownership group isn't afraid to actually spend money

- This is the biggest FA signing in our state's history of sports (no MN team has ever landed the "big fish" FA players that could have gone elsewhere.)

ok but back on topic a bit... let's say we do go with the OP thinking. Yes they rarely win a cup... just like the 8th seeded team rarely wins the cup... but it has happened, so don't just think we're only "1 step" better and will be a doormat for whoever we play in the playoffs.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

would this thread exist if the Nucks magically landed both players? no

Obviously landing two major star players doesn't mean you have a walking path to the cup. You still need for those players to work as a team AND you'll still need some "puck luck" along the way (every team benefits from that.. or at least benefits from not having "bad" puck luck.)

Not to derail the thread, but many of you fail to understand the significance of those two signings.

- Parisie will make those around him better because those other players should have more room to do things

- Suter should also make those around him better, and with a defensive core that is still very young, this will help confidence

- it proves that Pitt and Detroit don't have the market cornered on players that "want to win the cup." Actually this offseason is probably going to signal the end to Detroit being one of the top teams (unless they suddenly find some diamonds late in the draft.)

- These two players agree that our prospect crop is going to make us a contender in the next 5 years (but that's also going along with the thinking that they wanted to "just win")

- This current ownership group isn't afraid to actually spend money

- This is the biggest FA signing in our state's history of sports (no MN team has ever landed the "big fish" FA players that could have gone elsewhere.)

ok but back on topic a bit... let's say we do go with the OP thinking. Yes they rarely win a cup... just like the 8th seeded team rarely wins the cup... but it has happened, so don't just think we're only "1 step" better and will be a doormat for whoever we play in the playoffs.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you're getting the wrong impression from Canuck fans here. It was an exciting and huge moment getting the two top UFAs for Minnesota. They improved greatly and have a lot of young top end prospects in the system from what I understand so there will be a certain level of expectation. Add to that they were the top team in the league for the first 20 games last year and experienced a significant amount of injuries in the last half of the season and people will have much higher expectations for the team.

All that being said this level of commitment from ownership hasn't been constant. I read the letter that was posted on the Wild website from the owner earlier this week after the signings and can't say I'm really impressed. To have a franchise be successful for an ongoing basis the owner needs to be committed 100%, not just dip his toes in the water when he can make a big splash. Teams like Buffalo and Tampa Bay have made huge off season splashes in recent years and have followed it up with disappointing seasons. I don't think this will be the case here, Minnesota is a better hockey market than those teams I mentioned, but expectations for the franchise have to be tempered.

Minnesota needs to just make the first step of playing in playoffs, and yes in my opinion (trying to be objective) Minnesota is still several moves away from make it two rounds or more in the playoffs. Even competing for the Cup five years from now is unlikely given the young talent in the northwest division on opposing teams. Minnesota took a huge step forward but they won't suddenly be Cup contenders either.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone else concerned that the Kings have their entire team locked up next year (and core long term) and still have almost $9M in cap space? They could be a cap era dynasty. Especially if they get a break and have a delayed season. That to me is how you build a team. Long and slow with homegrown prospects then add some big names to the mix.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone else concerned that the Kings have their entire team locked up next year (and core long term) and still have almost $9M in cap space? They could be a cap era dynasty. Especially if they get a break and have a delayed season. That to me is how you build a team. Long and slow with homegrown prospects then add some big names to the mix.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone else concerned that the Kings have their entire team locked up next year (and core long term) and still have almost $9M in cap space? They could be a cap era dynasty. Especially if they get a break and have a delayed season. That to me is how you build a team. Long and slow with homegrown prospects then add some big names to the mix.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

how else am I supposed to take it when people were gushing over trying to get either Parisie or Suter a few months ago, and now suddenly people are saying; "oh well he'll be exposed as not being good" or other remarks making it sound like they didn't want to see either player land in Vancouver?

Actually if you look at the recent track record of the Wild front office... they traded away their only "top" player to San Jose... then they traded another "top" player to San Jose.. and just to make sure they weren't done they unloaded yet another defenceman that's been around almost since day 1. You think those aren't bold moves? And you know it's not just Fletcher making the calls on these moves either... they need an owner saying "yes" to spending all of this money. Now I'm not saying getting the top FA players will be the "norm" from now on, but what I can say is that you can't just "assume" the Wild won't go after big name guy and have a shot at them if they have cap space (and that those players won't seriously consider coming to MN.)

I do agree that Wild fans (like me) shouldn't just assume that we are a lock for a top 4 seed... but at the same time, I think this is the first time Wild fans can honestly say; "hey, crazier things have happened." And that's because this team is (on paper) better than the team that made their run to the WCF (and yes they got hot at the right time and caught teams with their guards down.)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can be a star and not make 6 Mill. I would say Kane, Towes, Byfuglien, Keith, Niemmi all played like all stars in Chicago's run.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

stars dont have to make big bucks...

ie. chicago...toews, kane, sharp, hossa, seabrook, keith

ie. boston... thomas, marchand,

ie. la... doughty, quick, brown, richards, kopitar

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Vancouver Canucks are the big thing here so there are a lot of dumb fans that get sucked in and are hypocritical. That being said I'm sure its the same in Minnesota for the Vikings. Fans everywhere want one player, then when he goes elsewhere do a 180 and say things like he will be exposed.

To be honest though I think it's an argument that has some merit. If Parise was on the Canucks he would most likely play on the second line with Booth and Kesler, thus avoiding the top shutdown D pair on the other team. Nashville is a truly remarkable franchise with does a lot with very little, they used unwanted pieces from other teams to continually be a competitive team. How much did Suter benefit from playing there alongside Weber? I think quite a bit.

Parise and Suter will be the go to guys on the Wild. Suter is going to be playing with a worse defensive partner on a team that isn't as good defensively. He's an elite puck mover though and he will have better players in Parise, Koivu, and Heatley to pass to than he did in Nashville. Parise I think will remain constant and there won't be any drop off.

You can call getting Heatley a bold move, which maybe it was, but it wasn't a good one. Heatley is a poor playoff performer, has brain damage based on the size of his pupils, and is a guy who lacks integrity. One of my least favourite NHL players.

Despite what I've said I'm not trying to rain on Minnesota's parade, they are a much better team, I don't remember the last time one team made such a big splash in free agency. Gomez and Drury going to the Rangers a few years back comes to mind but I can't see this turning out like that.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know there's always fans that do that (and usually MN teams are on the "losing end" of those players that leave.) And it bothers me when any fan (even those of my own team) does the whole "oh well we didn't want them anyways." If you wanted them, and you didn't get them... be honest.

ok back to the players though...

any time you bring in a FA player you still have to wonder about how well they will "mix" with the rest of the team. The Wild could've signed Crosby and Malkin, and you'd still have to worry that "it would work" on the Wild. So it's always going to have some level of merit. So we don't disagree there. Between the two, Suter will obviously be the "man I hope he doesn't stuck without the rest of the players" since he wasn't actually the guy to carry the team.

Yes Parisie will be looked at to be "the man" in Minnesota now, but then he was also kinda "the man" with the Devils as well. So this doesn't change things much. I do think he has more weapons in Minnesota... but not better weapons (if that makes any sense.) He should also benefit from this prospect group coming in (Granlund, Coyle, Phillips, etc.) because they will be playing more 3rd line duty (if they make the team) which could spread out that coverage (if they are scoring at a decent rate.)

Suter could also flourish in his new role with better people to pass up to (as you said.) And that's not to say that some of the young D-men won't improve from last year (not saying they will all be "Weber" but I think many of them showed a lot of promise last year especially as some of the others went down with injury.)

The Heatley deal had 2 sides to it... we unloaded Havlat who was also an "issue" in the locker room and on the ice (injuries and such.) So far, Heatley has outscored Havlat (who didn't even score 10 goals this year) because Havlat was injured so often this year... so in that sense, it was the better move. Plus we (Wild) haven't even made the playoffs... so who cares (at that point) if they get a guy who goes "missing" come playoff time? Our whole team has been missing the playoffs for years (hahaha.) And say what you will about him off the ice... he has far more integrity (on the ice) than these guys dishing out cheap elbows, head shots, etc. (I hate guys like Cooke, Tootoo, etc. even if they have "turned the other cheek" recently.)

I get where you are coming from, obviously this is all speculation on everyone's part at this point (since they haven't played a single game yet.) And I also agree this won't end like the Rangers getting DruryGomez since at that time, the Rangers were a "FA" team (nothing but FA stars with no core players or prospects.) In MN we actually do have our prospects coming in now and we still have a "core" of players (Koivu, PMB, Clutter, Broadz, etc.)

For me, I think our performance is going to depend more on the defense improving from last season and our forwards finding the net more than 1 or 2 times a game... both moves were upgrades on both sides of that, so that should mean we have a better chance at being a "solid" team (which is what I am expecting this year... that we end up 5th-8th seed.)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This model is proven to win cups.

Pittsburgh: In the crapper for years, managed to draft players such as Crosby, Malkin etc.

Chicago: Drafted Kane, Toews, that team could barely get 3000 people to the games before recently.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just because you don't get paid over 6M doesn't mean you aren't a star player.

Ward, E.Staal, Getzlaf, Perry, Selanne, Zetterberg, J. Staal, Fleury, Kane, Toews, Keith, Seabrook, Hossa, Sharp, Lucic, Bergeron, Thomas, M.richards, Carter, Brown, and Quick are all examples of that.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With Minny picking up both Parise and Suter, some have wondered if they are now a stacked team. Well in reality even a stacked team isn't necessarily the team to beat. We only need look at the 2000-2002 Rangers stacked team when they brought in a whole hockey sock full of superstars (Messier, Fleury, Lindros, Bure, Kovalev, Rucinsky, Holik etc.) and failed to even make the playoffs. But this is the Cap-era...so let's break it down capwise (the top player's salaries are the combined figure of the highest paid 6 forwards, 4 dmen and starting goalie):

2009-10 Champs (Chicago)

Top player's Salaries: 43.725m

Players making 6.0m and above: 1 (Campbell)

2010-11 Champs (Boston)

Top player's Salaries: 44.455m

Players making 6.0m and above: 1 (Chara)

2011-12 Champs (LA)

Top player's Salaries: 47.607m

Players making 6.0m and above: 2 (Doughty, Kopitar)

2012-13 Minnesota Team

Top player's Salaries: 51.755m

Players making 6.0m and above: 5 (Parise, Suter, Heatley, Koivu, Backstrom)

2012-13 Vancouver Team

Top player's Salaries: 47.85m

Players making 6.0m and above: 2 (Sedins)

It has been stated over and over again...star-laidened teams don't win Cups, teams with depth win Cups. Not to say that Minny won't have a good year, just saying that we, with our deep team, should not be all that concerned with them.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just because you don't get paid over 6M doesn't mean you aren't a star player.

Ward, E.Staal, Getzlaf, Perry, Selanne, Zetterberg, J. Staal, Fleury, Kane, Toews, Keith, Seabrook, Hossa, Sharp, Lucic, Bergeron, Thomas, M.richards, Carter, Brown, and Quick are all examples of that.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about the Detroit Red Wings and the Pens? Those star laden team with Crosby, Malkin, Letang, Zetterberg, Datsyuk, Listrom ect. didn't win the cup?? Star laden teams have higher chances of winning a cup because they have higher overall skills. LA who won this year is also a star laden team. They had Kopitar, Richards, Carter, Brown, Doughty and Quick on their team along with great depth in Gagner, Williams, Penner, Stoll, Mitchell, Scuderi, Greene, Voyonov, and King. Boston and Chicago also had a lot of stars, so I don't get what your point is?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.