Second half a mystery to Vanek
View Single Post
04-08-2012, 02:09 PM
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Originally Posted by
I read two things from this.
1) He's claiming the injuries didn't effect his game enough to make an excuse out of them, which to me sounds like trying to not blame his problems on something and trying to shoulder the load.
It sounds like the kind of response you'd see out of someone trying to be a leader
and not blaming his faults on something. That said, I think whatever little injuries he was working through did effect his game. Whether or not his game should've been effected that much by them is another question, but I have little doubt they were a factor.
Agreed - leaders don't make excuses and will always want to persevere no matter how slim the odds or tough the circumstances may be. I certainly interpret Vanek in that category.
Originally Posted by
2) Him getting "sucked in" to the funk just shows he's a complimentary piece to a team and not a lead figure.
Someone who's taking control of a team will rise above the rest of the team
sulking, see: Pominville, Jason.
Vanek going down with the ship just shows he's another player who needs someone to lead him
I think that's a little off-base - for starters, if we concede as you did in the paragraph above that injuries played a role in Vanek's reduced production, you have to acknowledge that Pominville's steady production benefited from him not having any injuries and not playing in nearly as many high-traffic areas as Vanek did.
There's also merit in arguing that, by playing through his injuries and "toughing it out" (even if the results weren't there) is one way of showing commitment and leadership that can inpsire teammates to do the same. Vanek could have probably taken the Connolly approach, where every slight hurt or cramp was cause to sit a game out for "precaution".
Thinking that Vanek wasn't able to inspire his teammates to better results because of his reduced production seems a bit flawed - especially when, despite his better stats, Pominville didn't make a difference in the rest of the team's play either.
It's the adage of "leading a horse to water but not being able to make him drink" that I think fits more appropriately - regardless of whether one considers Vanek and/or Pominville leaders, there are other players on the roster that didn't seem able or willing to compete and elevate their own play. Even Mark Messier wouldn't have been able to get some of the soloists on the roster to dig in and commit when they clearly were underachieving (and I put Roy, Stafford and Leino at the top of that group).
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Sabretip