| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| fly4apuckguy |
Posted - 11/24/2007 : 09:12:45
First, I want to go on record as saying I have always liked Vincent Lecavalier. I'm not a bandwagon jumper. I have been on board since he played in the World Juniors way back, and this was solidified when he was our (Canada's) most outstanding player in the 2004 World Cup. I knew after that tournament that he was a special player.
I still believe Crosby will win the league scoring race (once the Penguins fire Therrien and give his supporting cast a significant boot in their collective rears), but there is no denying Vinny's amazing talent right now.
He did, unlike a Sidney Crosby, take some time to develop into the player he is today. In the years before the lockout, I remember watching TSN and listening to guys like Bob MacKenzie talk about how he needed to finally start showing the promise he's been thought to possess. I also remember hearing that the Lightning were very close to shuffling him off to another team - they probably came within a hair of trading him a number of times, because the promise always outdid the results.
Lecavalier is 27 years old. He is now arguably the best player in the NHL (although I think his supporting cast makes him that much better). While he still has many great years ahead of him, he's no youngster anymore.
My thought is this? How many guys have played in the NHL for three or four years, only to have their confidence shattered by a coach or a GM that thought he had been given enough of a chance, only to be shuffled out of town or to the minors?
What did Vincent Lecavalier do that, say, Alexandre Daigle did not? Chris Gratton? Steve Junker? Martin Gendron? These are guys who, in junior, looked like sure things, but never amounted to much (I am aware that some are very obscure, but to make a point...)
Was it Vinny or was it the organization's patience that brought him where he is today? Did they put too much pressure on him early, and did he have to work through that to make it to where he is today?
Some of the plays he is making on the ice right now are amazing. Thank goodness the TBL stuck it out with him.
|
| 3 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| nashvillepreds |
Posted - 11/24/2007 : 13:36:14
I have to admit that I never really liked Lecavelier, I just thought he was kind of a show off. I'm beginning to like him though.
The last couple of years, after the lightning won the cup, he has really improved his play. The one thing I've noticed is that he's much more consistent than he was before the lockout. Consistency is actually the key word to be a leading scorer.
He's definitley always had the talent to be a leading scorer, but now he's proven himself to be one of the NHL's elite. It does help to be playing with a great linemate though.
St. Louis is another great name to go with the lightning organization. It's very hard to tell with St. Louis, he can either show up to a game and play greatly or just be an average player who looks like he should be scoring maybe 60 points per season. I think the only reason St. Lois got even 80 points last season was because of Lecavelier's elite and consistent play.
Great players lead players around them to greatness.
GO PREDATORS GO |
| irvine |
Posted - 11/24/2007 : 11:23:10
I give a lot of credit to the Lightening.
Some knew he would become a superstar. But, most organizations just do not give players the chance to develop. Not every player adapts to the NHL at a fast-pace. Some need time to develop to the game, at the NHL level. Once they figure out the NHL for themselves, and the skill is there, they will become what we thought or expected them to be. Some just never find it out.
But the TBL seemed to of had the feeling. Look at the money they have paid this guy, even before amounting to what he is now. I think that shows faith in him.
Of course, Lecav gets tons of credit to, more so than the TBL. Because let's face it, they put their support and faith in, but he has the skill and desire to be the best.
Irvine |
| andyhack |
Posted - 11/24/2007 : 11:06:47
I think both the Lightening organization and Vinny deserve some credit here.
People seem to like the Belliveau comparison with Vinny in terms of style of play, which is understandable, but I think that there may also be a comparison with Lafleur in terms of patience and rise to excellence.
Kids out there may not be aware of this but in his first couple of years Guy was far from the superstar that he was touted to be. Here are the stats from his first three years:
1971-72 Montreal Canadiens NHL 73 29 35 64
1972-73 Montreal Canadiens NHL 70 28 27 55
1973-74 Montreal Canadiens NHL 73 21 35 56
Montreal brought Guy along slowly, as they could afford to do given their depth of talent in those days. With a just developing/not yet a superstar Guy they still won the Cup in '73. I guess that is a key distinguishing factor in the comparison, and in that sense you have to give Vinny some credit too. Even when you consider the "Montreal pressure cooker" factor that Guy experienced, there may actually have been even more pressure on Vinny than on Guy to become great quickly because his team actually needed him to be great to be anywhere close to a Stanley Cup Champ (and great he was in the playoffs in their Cup year). Vinny was somehow able to weather the storm of that pressure and come through it. Hats off to him for that. |
|
|
