- Oct 26, 2006
- 18,751
- 12,006
I think that a player's level of competitiveness is defined by how determined and dedicated they are to be the best they can be. Some players train harder and longer because they want it more than the guy that doesn't. They eat better because they want to be the best they can be, better than the other guy.
For example:
Player A has an offseason diet of hot dogs.
player B eats a very strict performance focused diet.
Player B is more competitive because he's making more and/or bigger sacrifices to do well. He is clearly showing he wants it more. That's my take.
Well, that's kind of a generalization, though, isn't it?
Imagine if Player B spends his off-time talking to his agent about endorsement deals and figuring out a strategy for his upcoming contract negotiations, while Player A, the hot dog eater, goes to the rink by himself to skate and practice his fundies. And while Player A is in the weight room, Player B is working on his shot placement.
I think, really, that the level of competitiveness in a player is hard to quantify on an individual level. I think the assumptions are a little better-founded in team competitiveness - but even so, a hot dog eater can be elevated by teammates he wants to play hard for, while a performance-based-diet guy might meander if he feels like his usage isn't what he wants.
I guess the point is that it's a moving target, and a good coach can sense how to hit it even when it's in motion.