Beef Invictus
Revolutionary Positivity
Two points -
1) there are intangibles that matter, especially on young teams, a kid comes up and sees Giroux's dedication, that has an impact. When the clubhouse is full of self-starters, it sets the tone for the rest of the team, when there's a critical mass of high motor players, other players are less likely to take a shift off. When athletes make so much money at a young age, they need to be driven by competitive drive. Sometimes this is a maturity issue, Embiid went from a clown to killer when he realized that once you have money, it's not fun unless you win.
2) winning teams can patch over personality conflicts - but a toxic clubhouse often leads to teams imploding when the going gets tough.
Another positive example: Jagr.
As to point 2, that's something that goes beyond a single player though. And that's my big objection here; the idea that McDavid's intangibles are the make or break point. It's like if Clarke had ended up on that 74 Caps team; his vaunted leadership skills aren't salvaging that roster, nor should anyone think less of him for not managing an impossibility. But per the Intangible Method of analysis, he should be blamed. The notion that McDavid should be able to "leadership" hard enough to erase a stream of roster deficiencies and counter good goaltending is goofiness at best.
There's a hard limit on the wonders of intangibility.