Cup Winners vs Cup Chasers

[F A N]

Playoff time is always an interesting time to analyze what teams are doing right and what they are doing wrong. I thought the Canadiens and the Leafs were an interesting contrast. The Canadians added a few former Cup winners up front while the Leafs added Bogosian but up front only added guys who were still chasing the Cup. Did that play a role in the result?

In terms of storylines, we often hear that adding playoff tested veterans (especially Cup Winners) who know how to win has a trickle effect on the team. We also hear, like Leafs fans believed, that guys who were at the end of their careers but still chasing a Cup would be extra motivated. There may even be times where the team wants to win one for the old guy (e.g. Raymond Bourque). Obviously, I'm not talking about adding guys who won a Cup but can no longer play.

I know that as Canucks fans we are a bit jaded by overpaying for the Jay Beagles of the world, but I thought it would be an interesting discussion.

Click to read more...

 

[Hit the post]

I think the Habs recent success is a mirage (playing badly constructed opponents and/or Price reliving some old magic). I said this before, but I don't think it's that different from our playoff run last season. Still think their coaching change was a mistake but I've been proven wrong before lol. The Laffs star players, save Nylander simply didn't show up. Old timer like Spezza actually didn't do all that badly considering his role.

 

[MS]

Montreal is a mirage.

Toronto outplayed them and outscored them 18-12 in regulation (17-9 in the first 6 games) but lost two OT games. They get an OT bounce and that series is over in 5 or 6 games to the better team. This shit happens in small sample sizes in the playoffs.

Instead we have this insanity that Bergevin is super smart for bringing in Staal and Perry but Dubas is super dumb for bringing in Spezza and Thornton.

 

[AwesomeInTheory]

I think 'veteran presence' or 'Cup winner' or whatever are traits that are overvalued by people like Pierre McGuire. A romanticized view of the sport that doesn't have much basis in reality. I mean, what did "Cup winner" Chris Kunitz impart to Crosby when he joined the Penguins?

These are professional athletes. They are, for the most part, hyper motivated and ultra competitive. The desire to win is there regardless of if you're a rookie or a veteran.

There are things that can be taught by veterans, but are they make or break? I am skeptical.

I think the greater issue with the Leafs/Habs series is that the Leafs ran into quality goaltending, there was enormous pressure on them (compared to Montreal where there weren't really any expectations), suffered some key injuries (Muzzin and Tavares) and maybe were a little top-heavy with their team/cap structure.

Price playing out of his mind was more of a determining factor than Eric Staal being on the roster.

 

[vancityluongo]

We're talking about the fringes of the roster lol. Would you really argue that the Leafs win by swapping the experience of Staal (0 goals, 4 assists) and Perry (2 goals, 2 assists) for Thornton (1 goal, 0 assists) and Spezza (3 goals, 2 assists)? You don't think the bigger difference is that Mitch Marner had the same stat line as Staal while taking up almost three times the cap hit of any of Montreal's forwards aside from Anderson?

Tampa last year won with Pat Maroon, Curtis McElhinney, Luke Schenn and Zach Bogosian as their bottom of the lineup veterans.

Trying to disntiguish teams by levels of desire is one of the strangest things that hockey fans do. No other sport focuses so much on previous winning experience as if it actually factors into future success.

 

[F A N]

We're talking about the fringes of the roster lol. Would you really argue that the Leafs win by swapping the experience of Staal (0 goals, 4 assists) and Perry (2 goals, 2 assists) for Thornton (1 goal, 0 assists) and Spezza (3 goals, 2 assists)? You don't think the bigger difference is that Mitch Marner had the same stat line as Staal while taking up almost three times the cap hit of any of Montreal's forwards aside from Anderson?

Tampa last year won with Pat Maroon, Curtis McElhinney, Luke Schenn and Zach Bogosian as their bottom of the lineup veterans.

Trying to disntiguish teams by levels of desire is one of the strangest things that hockey fans do. No other sport focuses so much on previous winning experience as if it actually factors into future success.

Montreal also added Toffoli. He and Perry did score some key goals.

Maroon may be underrated here. He's Cup winner and his teams have failed to advance past the first round once in his career.

I'm not sure if it's all that strange for fans to try and distinguish teams with players that have the desire to win vs teams with players who folds when the going gets tough.

When Lebron's Lakers won the championship they actually headed into that season with a team full of "winners."

Brady's Buccaneers also had a team full of "winners" and of course added Brady and Gronkowski.

When the Dodgers won the World Series, they had 17 players who played in a World Series vs 1 for Tampa.

 

[m9]

Montreal also added Toffoli. He and Perry did score some key goals.

Maroon may be underrated here. He's Cup winner and his teams have failed to advance past the first round once in his career.

I'm not sure if it's all that strange for fans to try and distinguish teams with players that have the desire to win vs teams with players who folds when the going gets tough.

When Lebron's Lakers won the championship they actually headed into that season with a team full of "winners."

Brady's Buccaneers also had a team full of "winners" and of course added Brady and Gronkowski.

When the Dodgers won the World Series, they had 17 players who played in a World Series vs 1 for Tampa.

Some very odd choices for comparison here. Tampa Bay Bucs did not have a team of "winners", they had a team of fairly young guys and many of the veterans they added would be considered distractions or poor locker room guys like Antonio Brown, Fournette, JPP, and Suh. They got some of those guys at discounted rates partly because of their attitude and other concerns.

The winners they brought in were Brady and Gronk, and that's kind of the ultimate point to me. Don't bring in guys who have won, bring in guys who are great players and (if possible) have won or are good leaders.

In Lebron/Brady you are also talking about the best players of all-time so it's hard to extrapolate their success into other situations where you don't have that guy.

 

[Just A Bit Outside]

When talking about the Canucks, it’s not so much Cup Winners or Cup Chasers and more Playoff Observers.

“Just wait till <insert name here> gets a chance in the playoffs.”