What motivates you every day?
I believe it’s something you develop as you grow up. The competitiveness I have is something that fostered itself from my childhood. Coming from a large family it was all about being an “attention getter.” When you performed well, you got attention. I liked the feeling I got when I was complimented, and I believe that’s what motivates most people.
So it’s the result at the end of the day that drives you?
The result is, I don’t want to say inconsequential, but it’s not as important as the satisfaction that comes from performing well, and being recognized for per- forming well. You can string that any way you want if you’re a parent or coach. Mentioning to a child that they performed as well as they possibly could have, and really worked hard, is a great compliment to give kids. It’s not that I didn’t get com- plimented or praised or loved at home, but I think through sports it was a way of getting a little bit of extra attention that made me feel special.
During a period of time, let’s say with the Vancouver Canucks or with the Colorado Avalanche, when everything wasn’t going as smoothly as you hoped for the team, what did you do to keep yourself motivated and on top of your game?
I don’t think I’ve ever had a problem with motivation. I believe I have a strong desire to perform well and a strong desire to get the most out of what I have, whether that’s personally or, more important, in the profession that I’m in now. To squeeze as much out of the team you have is what you’re paid to do. When things aren’t going well with the team I’m coaching, I’m constantly searching for ways to improve it. You are constantly searching for ways to get that good feeling back, but you have to realize you only have control over certain things. You can really push a team’s effort, and then tactically you can take care of the cohesiveness of its play. I believe these are the two biggest areas that a coach can control. You can push on leadership and you can push on some other issues, but they are a little bit more complicated and they take up more time, and that’s a process that you work through.
Are players different today from the way they were when you played, and do you motivate them differently?
It feels like they are but I don’t think that they are that much different. I really don’t believe that.
Are their motives similar?
Their professionalism has improved, and I think it’s because of the education that’s out there, about how to do things, how to play, how to get in shape. I’ve seen that change pretty dramatically in the last 25 years. From the time I was playing to now, boy, the bar has been raised dramatically. There was a select group of people who were in great condition when I played, but now the bar is much higher, and most players are in at least pretty good condition, and a lot of players are at what we would have called the elite level. They understand the ramifications of perfor- mance and non-performance, of competing and not competing, a little bit better than at least I did. I think I was guilty as a player of taking things for granted, and I don’t see that as much in today’s athlete. I see them being much more directed. There are many more people who provide information about what it takes to com- pete at a higher level. You’ve got the European influence now that wasn’t there when I started, and most kids are coming through elite minor hockey programs and therefore have some pretty high-level coaching. I can honestly say that I didn’t get exposed to high-level coaching until major junior, and probably not until I was into professional hockey.
Do you make adjustments in motivating players who have an elite skill level?
Yeah, I think it is a little different. In motivating highly skilled players, I try to get them to understand the level of competition that they have got to be at, and that there are different spectrums of competing. Luckily I have been around some elite players and have been able to see the level of commitment that Joe Sakic has, the level of commitment that Patrick Roy has. Knowing that Markus Naslund has that level of talent, it’s been nice to see him build that level of commitment; the same thing with Todd Bertuzzi. Todd has come leaps and bounds from where he was. He’s gone from a guy who played well about 50 percent of the time, to now per- forming at that level well in excess of probably 80 percent of the time. If we can get it to over 90 percent, then you’re starting to deal with what the Joe Sakics and the Ray Bourques have.
It takes a huge commitment to get to that level. It’s important for skilled play- ers to understand that the commitment is huge, and that’s one of the things that I can help motivate them to do. You’ve got to appeal to their sense of competi- tiveness and their desire to be the best. If they have that as a core strength you can build on it. I suppose from a coaching standpoint if they don’t have it as a core strength, then you have to try to develop it as much as you can, make them realize how important it is for the team that they get to that level. There’s a team element
in it, and I have found that if most players don’t buy into the individual part of it, which you hope, they are certainly going to buy into the team part of it. They don’t want to let their teammates down.
Star players are usually easy to deal with, from my experience. Again, that level of commitment has to be there. A star player is pretty rare. There has been a huge price to pay all the way up for them to attain that elite level. I can’t think of anybody who’s been a superstar player who hasn’t had a pretty extraordinary level of com- mitment.
Do you communicate with star players differently to get them onside?
I don’t think that I do anything differently. Usually those superstar players end up being the leaders on your team, and we tend to communicate with the leaders in the group a little bit more regularly than with the other players. From that stand- point, yeah, that’s the difference, a little more regular interaction with those people, especially in terms of team things.
What type of player is most challenging to coach?
The deep thinkers, but they are sometimes the most fascinating.
Describe a deep thinker.
A deep thinker has to have most things mapped out for him and needs an understanding of why we do things. He’s got to sort it through in his own mind, and it’s got to make sense for him to do it. He has to have thought out every as- pect of the game. Then you’ve got the player at the other end of the spectrum, the blood-and-guts-type player who has no thought, just knows he has to play hard. He’s got to go. He’s got to play with passion. It takes both kinds to be successful.
There are a lot of people who are the deep-thinking type who would be so much better if they just allowed themselves a little bit more recklessness in their game, and allowed themselves to be a little bit more emotional. For them it’s a real stretch, just as it’s a stretch for the passionate player to take time to think more, but it’s easier to get a passionate player to slow down a little bit and learn to think things through. You may have to tell them four, five, six times why it’s done, but with the thinkers it’s a stretch to get them out of their comfort zone. Sometimes they get overwhelmed and won’t push themselves with passion. Their strength is that they have the best overall vision. As a player I was more of the passionate per- son who didn’t have a great scope, and now I’ve moved more toward the middle in my coaching. I’ve realized how important that is.
How would you challenge an athlete who is performing below potential?
Most players who play for me understand what’s expected of them. A combi- nation of people have a part in setting the standard for what is expected of them, including the coaching staff and the individual player themselves.
Do you set that up at the beginning of the year?
We have meetings to establish roles and to deal with expectations and with areas that we feel need to be strengthened, areas that are important to us. I think just making a player who is underperforming understand that there’s more for him to give and showing him the benefits of working harder, works. There’s a big payoff to pushing yourself a bit harder. The coach needs to make them understand what that is, and then acknowledge or reward them when they show progress. That really is the satisfaction that comes with performing at a higher level or pushing yourself higher than you thought you could go.
How did you help Todd Bertuzzi get to the next level?
I think a lot of it is the individual player. The light has to go on for the player, and then he realizes that if he wants to be successful at this high level there is a certain commitment that has to come. Commitment comes, in a large part, from the individual, so the individual has a major impact on whether or not they become a successful player. As a coach you have to set and adhere to a minimum standard of commitment that you expect from the players in practice, games, and from off- ice conditioning. Your bar needs to be very high. In Todd’s case our bar was pretty high, and it helped him along the way, but his individual talent and his individual commitment to better his play were the most important factors in his improve- ment.
Napoleon said there are two great levers to move men: fear and interest. Is there a spectrum there?
You captivate them with interest much longer. Fear is only going to work for a certain amount of time, although there is a place for it. There’s a time for that in the short term to make players aware that they’ve got to give more, but I believe if you use that tactic you certainly have to explain it to the player afterwards. Maybe you don’t have to explain it right away, to get the benefit, but you better have a little talk with them later and then explain exactly what you were doing.
0 comments: