Does the team make the player?

[CMPunk]

Something I've always wondered, would a superstar flourish on any team or is it the right team at the right time kind of thing?

For example, the two most common Flames ones are Brett Hull and Trevor Kidd. Would Hull have developed into the the 741 goal scorer if he had stayed with the Flames or would he have been lost in the shuffle of talent we had at the time? As for Kidd, people always complain we passed over Brodeur for him. Would Brodeur have turned into the winningest goalie of all time with us, or was he a product of the Devils trap system?

I'm of the opinion that short of a generational talent like Gretzky or Lemieux, most of the players success is due to environment and not talent.

Thoughts?

[Street Pharmacist]

I think there is strong evidence for both sides and likely, as all things seem to be, a combination. Funny, I've wondered this exact same thing many times.

Cheechoo. Was he good or was it Thornton. Spezza couldn't replicate what Thornton did with him.
On the flip side, Hossa seems to make every player better and Bouwmeester makes every player worse.
Chemistry, talent and dumb luck are important for any player or team. Defensive focus and strategy can really alter a players stats. Then confidence cones in to play, and it becomes so convoluted I don't think you can make anything other that a decent guess what will happen when a player moves teams

[tripin_billie]

It's also interesting to think about how a team can build the character of a player.

I'm thinking Iggy. I wonder if he would have risen to the leadership and take-a-team-on-my-back style if he had been on a team with other legitimate scoring threats? I think much of what makes Iggy great in the eyes of us Flames fans has to do with him being, at many times, the only player of value on the Flames.

I'm just thinking, his role on the Pens is going to be so much different, I just wonder if he had always been on a team with that type of talent, would he be the same character of player?

[Da_Chief]

Combination of both.

[JohnnyB]

Originally Posted by tripin_billie

It's also interesting to think about how a team can build the character of a player.

I'm thinking Iggy. I wonder if he would have risen to the leadership and take-a-team-on-my-back style if he had been on a team with other legitimate scoring threats? I think much of what makes Iggy great in the eyes of us Flames fans has to do with him being, at many times, the only player of value on the Flames.

I'm just thinking, his role on the Pens is going to be so much different, I just wonder if he had always been on a team with that type of talent, would he be the same character of player?

I actually look at Iggy very differently. His best individual shifts were 2004 but he rose to shine among Olympic talent by producing with them. He's shown he can be great among great talent.

[redforever]

Mario Lemieux played on a pretty crappy team for a long time and his talent still shone through.

[Steve Bozek]

Originally Posted by CMPunk

Something I've always wondered, would a superstar flourish on any team or is it the right team at the right time kind of thing?

For example, the two most common Flames ones are Brett Hull and Trevor Kidd. Would Hull have developed into the the 741 goal scorer if he had stayed with the Flames or would he have been lost in the shuffle of talent we had at the time? As for Kidd, people always complain we passed over Brodeur for him. Would Brodeur have turned into the winningest goalie of all time with us, or was he a product of the Devils trap system?

I'm of the opinion that short of a generational talent like Gretzky or Lemieux, most of the players success is due to environment and not talent.

Thoughts?

I think it was pretty clear Hull was an amazing goal scorer right from the beginning. In his rookie season, with the Flames, he scored 26 goals in 52 games, with restricted ice time and a coach who didn't like him)

The point about goalies might be valid though - the Flames have let a few good ones go, only to see them prosper in a different system: Roloson, Anderson, and Giguere being quick examples that come to mind.

[troutman]

Goalie stats are largely influenced by how the team plays.

[Max Cow Disease]

I've pondered the same thing. I often look at the Wings and wonder what it is about their incubation system that always produces such spectacular prospects from even the final rounds of the draft. Datsyuk really had interest from only a couple of teams when he was taken in the 6th round, and would many of the other guys that they've picked over the years have emerged as stars on other teams also, or is Detroit simply that stellar of an organization? Is it merely a function of scouting?

I look at a team like that, versus our own (in terms of drafting/developing players) and sometimes assume that they'd have even turned Kris Chucko into a respectable NHL regular.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by troutman

Goalie stats are largely influenced by how the team plays.

Bryzgalov agrees.

And then counts money.

[Roof-Daddy]

I was always wonder this when I'm gloomily perusing through past drafts and seeing all the eventual stud NHLers that Flames missed out on in favor of the Chucko's, Nemisz', Pelech's of the prospect bone yard, and I think.....I wonder if Krejci/Marchand/Lucic/Stastny/Benn/Yandle/etc would have become what they became if the Flames had drafted them instead of the busts they did draft.

[Daliwan]

Originally Posted by redforever

Mario Lemieux played on a pretty crappy team for a long time and his talent still shone through.

Good point. It really depends on the player's personality.

[The Swedish Flame]

Put differently, would John Tavares have the same/higher/lower production if he played on a more talented team?