Finding the Right Piece
Every coach and management in each sport can have daunting task when seeking the right players for that particular team especially in the professional level when
results determine one’s future with that team.
As the trade deadline approaches for the MLB,
basketball trades finally coming to a conclusion and the NFL getting ready for
pre-season, each team’s goal is to win the championship. That is the sole
reason for playing a ‘team’ sport, correct?
Lately commentators discuss the strengths and
weaknesses of each team and based on statistics, these analysts share his/her
opinion on the team that will eventually win the ultimate prize.
Ashley Fox, an analyst recently discussed the
weaknesses of the Philadelphia Eagles. Let’s examine an analyst’s point of
view: 90% is based on statistics and 10% the overall performance and history of
teams and each player. The big issue most analysts overlook is that the best
player is not always the right player for that team. For instance, the Eagles
secondary has no all-pro players and most have been recently drafted. That is a position the Eagles will surely address, however, without a superstar safety, it does not mean the Eagles will lack skill in that position. Recently seen in professional sports, the big name stars will not equate to imeditate success. A perfect example is the secondary of the Philadelphia Eagles in 2012. Last year the Eagles felt Nnamdi Asomugha and Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie were the answer for the defense. Neither player lived up to the hype. Does this mean these players were exposed and are only average football players? No. It may mean that within the particular system of the Eagles, those players' talents were not evident or used best within that system. How can a team be successful if the best players do not reach his potential? How can a team be rated weak in that position with top players? The answer is simple: the correct piece that is needed for the Eagles is the right player, not necessarily the best.
Back in 1980, Herb Brooks took 20 collegiate ice hockey players and made them superstars when the US National Team defeated the Russians in the semi-finals of the Olympic games which eventually resulted in winning the gold medal. His mentality was finding the right players, not the best players. All-star teams fail because the individual athlete relies solely on his skill whereas the right players use his skill for the betterment of the team that is used within a designed system. Most analysts will state that professional teams do exactly what Herb did, but with high contracts and regulations, it limits a team longevity and time to develop such players within that system. Yes, there have been championships won by having the best players, but there has also been teams will the right players, not the best and that is evident in the 2003 Philadelphia Eagles team who had below average wide-receivers and the 2008 Philadelphia Phillies who won games with a pitcher who was 48 years old. Each team had solid players including youth and veterans, but they won because of the passion and joy they shared playing together as a team and mastering the little aspects of the game. Each team relied on each other and trusted that player would made the correct play or decision. Now, each sport is played for that individual athlete to get a nice pay check for his future, who feels justified if he had only one good season and will do anything to receive the pay regardless of the team.
Today, there is no team. Teams are paying players high contacts which is killing the overall team dynamics and as a result, it limits the overall productivity and enjoyment from the game. When players were hardly paid, they played for the love of the game and his teammates. The games were exciting. Now, teams who try to buy the best player in free agency may get burned or benefit from the move, but there is no more loyalty in the game. The right pieces are now becoming extinct and the game is evolving to individualism.
I am sorry to those analysts who rely on statistics as the main answer, not a tool for athletes and success for the game. Just like a computer, stats only represent an aspect of a ball player. The heart, loyalty, and determination cannot be quantified. I would rather coach or watch my favorite teams pick a million average ball players who can play together doing the small things correctly than having one super star.
Besides most super stars benefit from those so called average players that surround them...thats the beauty of a team sport. Let's hope the future professional athletes will be better than our present athletes in which these players have skill, heart, and intuition Too many players now are being praised for mediocrity or lauded for doing what is expected. Hold each player to higher standards and be tougher because then each player will learn to rely on his teammate.
In the end, success of a team is determined by all of those varying pieces that fit perfectly within the bigger puzzle.
"The way a team plays as a whole determines its success. You may have the greatest bunch of individual stars in the world, but if they don't play together, the club won't be worth a dime."-Babe Ruth
