Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site dciem.UUCP
Path: utzoo!dciem!jeff
From: jeff@dciem.UUCP (Jeff Richardson)
Newsgroups: net.sport.hockey
Subject: Re: how to build a contender
Message-ID: <1480@dciem.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 25-Mar-85 09:40:03 EST
Article-I.D.: dciem.1480
Posted: Mon Mar 25 09:40:03 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 25-Mar-85 11:06:34 EST
References: <burdvax.1968> <1466@dciem.UUCP> <ucla-cs.4468>
Reply-To: jeff@dciem.UUCP ( Richardson)
Organization: D.C.I.E.M., Toronto, Canada
Lines: 42
Summary: 

> 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