How much stock do you put into a player's intangibles?

[jayswin]

I often see intangibles like off ice leadership, presence in the room, charcter etc, written off as not that important and dismissed quite easily on CP.

I totally understand that there's a point where a better player is a better player, or a bubble player isn't good enough to take up a spot despite anything else he brings.

But I feel like sometimes it's brushed off too quickly and isn't weighted heavily enough in a player's value, and I assume a lot of that has to do with the stats crazy hockey world we live in where everyone wants to make definitive statements and rate every player, and feel like they're a hockey "expert" without actually having any connections to teams.

Not a huge gripe, however we had a thread on Deryk Engelland last week and I saw a lot of "bah intangibles, he's a crappy player, get him off the team" (not in those words) and a stark contrast was this article yesterday by Wes Gilbertson with Pens players speaking to Engelland's time in Pittsburgh.

http://www.calgarysun.com/2015/02/05...calgary-flames

He’s one of those guys you always miss having around,” said Penguins centre Brandon Sutter. “He’s just a heart-and-soul player. He works hard. He’s not the most talented guy in world. He might not be the fanciest guy to watch play. But he’s a team guy, and he plays the game the right way, and he’s tough as nails, too. He’s the first guy to stand up for a teammate, and things like that just make him a valued part of the team.”

“That’s a big part, I think, of what’s got me to this level — just be a good teammate, be a good guy, stick up for my teammates … ” Engelland said. “Whatever I can do to make someone better or help someone out, I do. To hear people say that to a team that you’re going to, it’s a good feeling to have. It’s a great feeling to know that you left that impression on them.”

I don't know if it's really thread worthy, but just something to think about when dismissing intangibles in a hockey player.

[Enoch Root]

not everyone on CP dismisses them.

[FBI]

Like someone else said recently, I'm pretty happy that the flames have put a lot of stock in "character players" recently in the draft like the picks of Monahan, Bennett, Poirier, Klimchuk..

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

not everyone on CP dismisses them.

Correct.

[Finger Cookin]

Exactly 40%

[Two Fivenagame]

Intangibles are difficult to evaluate in the context of a forum where contributors want proof.

Is Engelland good in the dressing room?

yes

prove it

post article

How do you know the players aren't just saying nice things about him in the media but are happy he is on another team?

-----

IMO I think intangibles are very important to the overall player but as a fan I try not to pretend I know anything.

[Hugh Jahrmes]

Originally Posted by Finger Cookin

Exactly 40%

In this economy, Im mostly holding intangibles cash

[Hackey]

I definitely believe in intangibles. I think a lot of times it's what separates the great players from the good players and the great teams from the good teams. The more well rounded the team or player the better. Some players can make up for a lack of intangibles with pure skill and some can make up for a lack of skill with intangibles. It's a difficult thing to measure but it obviously exists.

[Iniggywetrust]

I would put a lot of stock in intangibles. In any sport, pure talent is never enough, and a lot of time talent alone can be a hindrance. Look at the seahawks. When most of their star players were drafted, they weren't ranked highly or seen to have the most talent. But through hard work and a great atmosphere, they worked hard at their craft and became champions. On the other end of the spectrum is the lowly oilers. A team full of talent and very little intangibles like leadership and a desire to win.

[Yrebmi]

I am not putting a lot of stock in Engelland's intangibles. I have not been a fan of his play.
McGrattan had all those intangibles too.

[GranteedEV]

I would prefer it Engelland was

1) Paid for less years.
2) Sitting in the press-box
3) Better tangibly, at least defensively if not offensively.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Yrebmi

I am not putting a lot of stock in Engelland's intangibles. I have not been a fan of his play.
McGrattan had all those intangibles too.

Yes, and it made him a great team-mate and helped contribute to the chemistry this team has developed

[troutman]

80/20

Skill/Intangibles

[landshark]

I won't give intangibles much attention since they mostly can't be verified. I have no idea what goes on in the room. The people that do say NOTHING specific about what happens behind those closed doors. Visiting sick kids in the hospital is nice, but has nothing to do with playing hockey.

[Hackey]

I don't think visiting kids in the hospital is what people are talking about when they bring up intangibles. Maybe something more like the leadership qualities that make Jonathan Toews great when there are plenty of players more talented than him.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by landshark

I won't give intangibles much attention since they mostly can't be verified. I have no idea what goes on in the room. The people that do say NOTHING specific about what happens behind those closed doors. Visiting sick kids in the hospital is nice, but has nothing to do with playing hockey.

I was talking about intangibles relating to the success of the team, not good things they do in their spare time.

[Yrebmi]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Yes, and it made him a great team-mate and helped contribute to the chemistry this team has developed

yup and I am a fan of Brian McGrattan. He still got waived and then sent down, intangibles or not. Still not a fan of Engelland. I wish we had a better option.

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Originally Posted by troutman

80/20

Skill/Intangibles

It's pretty much my thoughts as well. Intangibles are important, and matter if you're trying to build a championship team, because without them you won't get far in the playoffs.

However, if you can offer intangibles but no talent then you don't belong in the NHL. Being able to play the game will trump intangibles often, but if you have both talent AND intangibles, you have the makings of a guy that will win cups wherever he goes.

[heep223]

A lot of stock.

[Toonage]

Every time I bring up intangibles I'm pretty much told I'm an idiot so I feel this thread is trolling me.