Quote:
Originally Posted by Buff
You single out the addition of Fedorov. Sergei Fedorov joined the team in 1990-91. Lidstrom, another key member of the team was a rookie in 91-92. They were a strong team from about 91-92 and on, always tinkering and adding depth to keep improving. The key addition for their first cup was trading Primeau and Coffey for Shanahan.
Yes, Bowman got Yzerman to change how he played. It wasn't just Yzerman who bought into Bowman's plan. The team wouldn't do it if their top scorer and captain wasn't going to.
|
It's overstated is all I'm saying.
Detroit drafted Yzerman in 1983.
Detroit made the playoffs in 8 of 10 seasons before Bowman was hired. They already had playoff success, twice losing in the conference finals to Edmonton. Yzerman probably already had a cup if not for the Edmonton dynasty in the 80s.
For the system that Bowman was trying to build getting Yzerman to buy into becoming a more well rounded player probably helped out. And of course Bowman is going to say it helped, he's also a little biased considering it was his idea and adds to his lore as coach.
But my take is that team wins a stanley Cup anyways. Fedorov was a top center in the league at that point and had entered his prime winning his second Selke in three seasons that year (Actually kind of funny too that Yzerman gets the credit for committing to defense when Fedorov was the one leading the team in scoring & winning Selkes). Lidstrom just entered his prime as a perennial Norris candidate, finishing as a Norris finalist for the 1st time in 97-98.
That team had 7 hall of famers. A hall of fame coach. Two goalies that get mentioned in the Hall of Fame Snub Discussions. And a great supporting cast with guys like Kozlov, Maltby, Draper, Konstantinov, Lapointe, McCarty, etc. They probably win a cup with that talent either way.
Without that type of elite supporting cast it doesn't matter if Yzerman decides to play better defense or not. And that's the whole point. Doesn't matter for Eichel up to this point in his career if he buys into playing a "more complete" game or not (which as I've mentioned his defensive results have been better the past two seasons and he's mentioned he's focusing on that part of his game). He doesn't have near the supporting cast that it would matter one way or another.
And it's no different than McDavid either. Based on advanced metrics he was much, much better defensively this season after he was blamed for the bubble failure the year before. Where did that get him without a team around him that was good enough to win?