I want every player on my team to have a net positive impact on the team, or at least somebody that breaks even, and that means real tangible hockey abilities that lead to winning. Thats what championship caliber teams are made of. They don't have one dimensional players that fit roles, they dont add guys that cant have at least a slightly positive outcome on the game.
Of course, that is the goal. Yes I want every player on my team to be a good player and be a complete player with 100% compete 100% of the time and no mental lapses, etc. But it is unrealistic. I am sure you can go through the roster of Cup teams from the past few years and find a few "specialists" in whatever position they are in (e.g., offensive first/no defense defensemen, defense first/no offense defensemen, power forwards who aren't great skaters or defenders but play well in the offensive zone in front of the net and around the boards, and so forth and so on).
Again, yes the goal is to have complete players everywhere, but that is not realistic. Not every player needs to be the best skater, shooter, passer, defender, etc. Would be great if they were but sometimes you need to make a choice: do I want the guy I think can be a power play specialist and net-front presence who will rack up PP points and dirty but good goals, or do I want the guy who won't create as many goals but will be better defensively and on the rush? Probably depends on the makeup of the team already, but if you have a team of fast skating small guys, you may be great on the rush or creating scoring chances, but without that big net-front presence you may not have the guy that can bang home the rebound. If you have a team of giant slow-moving net-front power forwards, you probably won't be able to create a lot of offense on the rush. And so forth and so on.
