On Inconsistent Brilliance—or Why It’s Still Better to Have Superstar Talent than No Talent at All

Hockey Consultant didn’t actually get to see the opening games of the NHL season.  (Sadly, Hockey Consultant recently moved and is annoyed with her limited options for Internet and cable service and still does not have the ability to view games online or on TV, though hopefully that situation will be rectified soon.)  In lieu of actually watching the games, Hockey Consultant utilized her smart phone to listen to an opening game and follow evening long chatter on various online forums and, of course, Twitter.

Hockey Consultant found herself very annoyed as she wondered about how two former All-Stars had actually played.   Some people complained that former Conn Smythe winner Evgeni Malkin and finished-sixth-in-Norris-Trophy-votes-in-his-age -23-&-4^th-NHL-season Kris Letang played horribly.   Both, it was clear, had shifts that resulted in taking penalties that should not have been taken.      Yet, there was another side to how these two players had played, as seen in other chatter:  Fans of the opposing team marveled at the talent of both players.  In between moments of “What-the-heck-was-that?!”, said negatively of chances that weren’t finished and giveaways, there were other moments of “What-the-heck-was-that?!” said in regard to brilliant plays that less talented players just can’t make.

Hockey Consultant did see one thing, though, which is why she prefers to view herself as a consultant (one who, on rare occasions, notices things that could be useful).    When the game was on the line—admittedly in the regular season way of a shootout—the Penguins had two All-Star talents capable of closing out a win.

That’s the thing about players with superstar talent, the kind that the two players apparently having very “mixed” games had.   Even when they have “off” nights and do terrible things that they don’t do on nights when everything is “on”, any competent GM or coach (note:  not a journalist, not a blogger, and not a fan) still wants those players on his team.   Because those players—even on an off-night—gave the Penguins something they would not have had if they didn’t have players with those talent.

Those kinds of players—even on their “off” nights where mistakes happen—still do more to help a team win than lose.   And when evaluating their games, as 24-7 showed us that GM Ray Shero and Head Coach Dan Bylsma regularly do, you might give them a middling grade of 3.  But you might bump those grades to 3.5 given how they came through in the shootout.   And you might also note that even on nights where their games were around a 3 level—they ultimately had key contributions in a victory on the road against one of last year’s elite teams. 

And you might be best off remembering that, for the most part (there will be occasional horrific games for even the best of players), what Hockey Consultant would encourage any frustrated GM or coaching staff to remember if they ever sought her advice for dealing with the reality that even superstars don’t always play at “level 5” (A+) level every night.   That superstar talent is what every team in the league covets because, well, that kind of talent can still end a game with one save, or one shot, no matter what happened the rest of the game.

So, consider this Hockey Consultant’s friendly reminder:  If your team has superstar talent, it means you’ve got a better shot at winning the game with one or two plays.   You’re never out of it.   You can always come back.

And those players you’re mad at for being inconsistent?

They’re superstar talents because they can play better—and there’s every chance they will.

So look forward to them playing better.  And, by the way, enjoy the win you got when your two superstar talents had “less than perfect” and even “inconsistent” games and still delivered a win for your team.